Our title (1): The Traditional Mass movement exists for the purpose of preserving the traditional Latin Mass of the Roman rite.
The Tridentine Missal of Pope
St. Pius V became a distinct rite (i.e. distinct from other parent rites known as the
Antiochan and Alexandrian) in the fourth century. Early Popes refer to its roots as going back to St. Peter.

Our motto (1): means "He makes the dumb speak." Canon 212 says that we may make known our needs and wishes to our
Pastors. It asserts our right, even duty, to manifest to them our views on matters which concern the good of the Church. It also
maintains our right to make known our views to our fellow members in the Church. This canon requires of course that one speak
with due respect.

Editorial Policy (1): Can be deduced from an article on The Traditional Mass Movement (the need for its existence, problems,
ideals, etc.) to appear in a 1994 summer issue of The Homiletic and Pastoral Review (New York, Kenneth Baker, S.J., editor.)
Traditional Mass communities across Canada from Nova Scotia to British Columbia can be represented by their own
contributing editors.

Editorial Style (1): Sometimes indicative but more often interrogative. The Communications Decree Inter nunfica, promulgated
simultaneously with the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy in 1963, assures the right of information to all members of a society in
matters which concern them. The Roman Rite will vindicate that right in matters liturgical. It will seek answers from competent
and authoritative sources to the questions it asks and pass them on. It will
furnish more ample information and documentation in the form of booklets, etc. It will list books and articles appearing elsewhere
and provide synopses of their contents. The headings will be suitable for building up a computerized data base, that is, an
electronic dictionary. The numerals following each heading will provide a convenient reference to each of the items that
aceumulate under that particular heading.

Altar Girls (1): The S.C. of Divine Worship, in its instruction Liturgicae instaurationes of Sept. 7, 1970, said "the traditional liturgical
norms of the Church prohibit women (young girls, married women, religious) from serving the priest at the altar." It reiterated
this prohibition in its instruction Inaestimabile donum of April 3, 1980. Now The Catholic Register of April 23, 1994, reports that the
S.C. of Divine Worship has announced that women are not necessarily prohibited from serving at the altar. In theory, bishops
can individually permit or prohibit as they wish. Confusion worse confounded! This announcement dismays loyal supporters of
Pope John Paul II as much as it delights his adversaries. The latter consider it an act of capitulation which they gleefully
anticipate will be; followed by others. Questions in the minds of those scandalized are prompted by two items in The Catholic
Register report: 1) "The Vatican's letter explained that the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts had
decided the basic question in 1992 with a one-sentence ruling on Canon 230 of church law. The ruling was 'affirmative'
regarding female altar servers ...."; 2) the Vatican press spokesman, Navarro-Valls, "emphasized that the decision resolves a
pastoral question, not a doctrinal one." This is very puzzling. How can Canon Law decide a basic question of liturgy, given that
liturgy is a law unto itself? And given that lex orandi (the law of liturgy) is intimately and
wholly bound up with lex credendi (the law of belief), how can an important matter like the role of women relative to the Holy
Sacrifice of the Mass not have a doctrinal implication? Competence in matters of doctrine lies with the S.C. of the Doctrine of
the Faith. Was it consulted? The Synod of Bishops meeting at Rome in 1990 on the question of the priesthood was also seized
with that of altar girls. Bishops favourable to the feminist cause, given that they could not insert the question of women priests
into the agenda, sought to introduce, as a "thin edge of the wedge" tactic, that of altar girls. Their chief protagonist was
Archbishop Weakland of Milwaukee. At a ceremony of departure for Rome, he had himself anointed on the forehead by a
woman who thus conferred on him the mission of representing the feminist cause at the Synod. As the newspaper photograph of
Weakland being anointed was circulated to the members of the Synod, they were under no illusions about the significance of the
altar girl question as posed to them. The proposal that the question be included in recommendations to the Pope was rejected by
the Synod on doctrinal grounds. In 1992, the Pope issued the document pursuant to its recommendations entitled Pastores dabo
vobis - "I will give you pastors." A normal way for God to give us pastors is to give altar boys the grace of vocation to the
priesthood. Will not God, now faced with having to discriminate between boys and girls presented to Him in the sanctuary, settle
the matter by withholding the grace of priestly vocation from both?

St. Clement's Community, Ottawa, Ontario (1):
The Traditional Mass community in the capital of Canada is certainly one of the oldest such communities in the postconciliar
Church. In 1967, Rome proposed that the Holy Mass continue to be celebrated in Latin in major cities for "the benefit of the
international community." A French diplomat made a request that such a Mass be provided in Ottawa. Archbishop Plourde
granted the request and allowed a community to be formed, the first Latin Mass being celebrated on March 3,1968. In 1993,
Plourde's successor, Archbishop Marcel Gervais
assigned a beautiful parish church, under the title of St. Clement's, and erected the community into a quasi-parish. Interesting
items about other Traditional Mass communities in Canada will follow.

Sacred Music (1): The Gregorian Reform of sacred music launched in 1903 by Pope St. Pius X, being an aesthetic approach ("I
want the people to be assured of the beauty of their prayer" said he) needed generations to develop. It had attained much
momentum on the eve of the Second Vatican Council. The Vatican II reform was not intended to replace or cancel the
Gregorian Reform. The latter has recently come into prominence thanks to the Benedictine monks of the Abbey of Santo
Domingo de Silos in the Spanish province of Burgos. They recorded discs of Gregorian chant in 1973 and 1980 to commemorate
respectively the 900th anniversary of the death of the founder of their monastery, Santo Domingo de Silos, and the fifteenth
centenary of the birth of St. Benedict. A disc made recently has been an immense success. Millions of copies have been sold
worldwide and the sale continues. The buyers are mainly in the age bracket of 16-25. It is not the vernacular which moves them
but music. But it has to be music out of this world. In the absence of heavenly music, they are in danger of succumbing to the
music of the underworld, such as "heavy metal" rock and roll. Gregorian chant raises the very words of the Mass to lyrical and
indeed celestial heights of expression. Such sacred music his a tradition of three millennia behind it. The first millennium of its
development was in the Jewish Synagogue and Temple. The first Christians were Jews who brought this exquisite language of
the sacred liturgy to us. It became known as Gregorian chant, thanks to the genius of St. Pope Gregory the Great (590-604.) The
Traditional Mass movement and the Gregorian movement of liturgical reform have a deep affinity for each other. Together they
ensure the perpetual existence of the Roman Rite. The title of the Spanish monks' recording is Canto Gregoriano. Produced on
two cassettes or discs by Capital Records and distributed by Emi Music Canada.

Our title (2): While the altar question has prompted the launching of this paper, its title indicates that its scope is far broader and
deeper. This is more than a case of disruptive change in liturgical practice. It is a case of Canon Law being used to bring about a
disruptive change in liturgical law. And the discomfiture of Rome to boot. As it is the Rock of Peter at Rome which gives the
Roman rite its stability, has it not now been destabilized by a one-sentence interpretation of an ambiguous article of Canon Law
that is too cryptic to be able to escape the imputation of also being one-sided?

Wild masses (1): This is a heading which refers to a phenomenon which has plagued the postconciliar liturgical reform from its
beginnings and which alone justifies the existence of the Traditional Mass Movement. Our first item is about a "wild mass"
concelebrated last October in a large Chicago hotel by 2000 people, with a bishop and 200 priests interspersed amongst them.
They met under the watchword of "Call to Action." This is a name given to an annual conference which met for the first time at
Detroit in October, 1976, as an American version of a similar initiative which had previously begun in Holland and was called a
National Pastoral Council. Such gatherings are inspired by the idea that the modern church needs to be governed by an annual
parliamentary assembly on democratic lines. The "wild mass" was celebrated by the "Call to Action" assembly distributed around
dozens of tables. At each table there was bread and wine to be "consecrated." As principal "presiders," a woman and a priest
officiated from a raised platform in the centre. Such things constantly happen with impunity and without a word of episcopal
remonstrance.

What must be done (1): The Apocalypse of St. John is about quae oportetfieri cito (1-1) - "what
must be done quickly." We in the Traditional Mass movement suffer from a feeling of helplessness. There seems to be so little
we can do. True enough. But the little we can do, we must do. And do it quickly. That is why we have started this little paper. It
will seek to lessen illiteracy in matters liturgical and move people to come to the defence of the Roman rite.

What must not be done (1): We must avoid the "quarrel about rites" between the traditional Roman Rite and the Novus Ordo
which has sadly weakened the Traditional Mass movement. Besides four bishops and 200 priests, we are told there a million
Catholics who have left us to struggle by ourselves to keep the Roman Rite within the main body of the Church. The Novus
Ordo has made its bed with disruptive changes accomplished by fait accompli and will have to lie in it. Nevertheless, we wish it
well. That is, we hope it will eventually overcome the disability of being a "fabrication" (to use Cardinal Ratzinger's term for it)
and become a liturgy that is the fruit of organic development.

Altar girls (2): Apparently Rome has notified episcopal conferences by letter under date of March 15,1994, that, on the basis of
"an authentic interpretation of Canon 230 #2 of the Code of Canon Law," it is within the competence of each Bishop, in his
diocese, to decide whether or not to permit girls to serve the priest at the altar during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. The
possibility is ingenuously envisaged of bishops actually opposing altar girls as if they would thus dare to incur the wrath of
feminists. If the Pope cannot stand firm with his full and supreme power, what can an ordinary bishop do? The letter
notwithstanding is couched in "iffy" terms:
"If in some diocese, on the basis of Canon 230, #2, the Bishop permits that, for particular reasons, women may also serve at the
altar, this
decision must be clearly explained to the faithful, in the light of the above-mentioned norm." Canon 230 stipulates in its first
paragraph that "Lay men... can be given the stable ministry of lector and of acolyte, through the prescribed liturgical rite." That is
clear enough. The ugly head of ambiguity is raised by switching the subject in the following two paragraphs from "lay men" to
"lay people." The letter continues, "At its meeting of June 30, 1992, the members of the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation
of Legislative Texts examined the following dubium (i.e. doubt) which had been proposed to them. "Whether service at the altar
can also be included among the liturgical functions which lay persons, either men or women, can fulfill according to C.C.L. Can.
230 #2?" The answer was:
"Affirmatively (yes) and according to instructions that must be given by the Apostolic See." This is a one-sentence ruling with no
explanation. But one wonders why they could not have been equally, if not more, justified in deciding negatively. That is, they
could have taken into consideration the precedents established by the Holy See in giving instructions that were negative in 1970
and 1980 and also by the Synod of Bishops in responding negatively when the question was put to them in 1990. The letter says
that the affirmative decision must be clearly explained to the faithful.

Our perplexity grows when we look at Canon 2 which
says: "For the most part the Code does not determine the rites to be observed in the celebration of liturgical actions. Accordingly,
liturgical laws which have been in effect hitherto retain their force, except those which may be contrary to the canons of the
Code." The liturgical law that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is a rite in which only males can officiate is founded on a tradition
which has existed for two millennia. It is therefore tremendously antecedent to Canon 230 which is in a Code promulgated only
in 1983. Its weight and precedence are such that one would think it would need to be abrogated rather than merely interpreted
out of existence. What needs to be known is this: was it pertinent and judi
cious to deal with the dubium in question prior to resolving another of immensely overriding and capital importance? We refer to
the dubium posed by the liturgical scholar, the late Mgr. Klaus Gamber, as to whether even the Pope can exercise his full,
supreme power to abrogate a liturgical tradition rooted in apostolic times. (cf La Reforne liturgique en question, Editions Sainte
Madeleine, 1992, pp. 31-40.) For the purpose of that power is to uphold apostolic tradition, not undermine it.

History (1): The early Christians in northern Africa had their own special word for the Holy Mass. It was Dominicus, an intensely
meaningful and compact word which stood for what the Lord does on the Lord's day. The following episode took place in the
year 304 in a place called Abitina at the height of the persecution ordered by the Emperor Diocletian. A group of about fifty
North African Christians were arrested for attending Mass in the house of a man called Emeritus. As Jungmann says, "Anyone
and everyone could believe what he pleased, but that the Christians should shun the official state worship in favour of their own
cult - that was the reason for the persecution . . . Every Sunday they went to celebrate the Eucharist in common, though this
endangered their lives" (Early Liturgy, Notre Dame Press, 1959, p.12-13.) Emeritus was asked why he permitted a kind of
assembly forbidden by law to take place in his house. He replied simply that as the people who came were his friends, he had no
wish to keep them Out. "But you ought to have forbidden their entry" his interrogator insisted. To this Emeritus replied Sine
Dominico non possumus - "Without what the Lord does on the Lord's day (i.e. the Mass), we cannot exist." The persecutors were
told in effect that it was useless to threaten Christians with death, for without the Mass they could not live anyway. The priest,
Saturninus, boldly replied, Intennitti Dominicum non potest - "What pertains to the Lord cannot be set aside." Diocletian's decree is
null and void in regard to the Sunday Mass.

The Roman Rite is a supplement to the Precious Blood Banner
P.O. Box 8100, Station T, Ottawa, Canada, KiG 3H66

Coalition/Ecciesia Del (1): Full name is Coalition in Support of Ecelesia Dei. It is located in the Chicago area: P.O. Box 2071,
Glenview, Illinois, 60025-6071. Directed by Mary M. Kraychy, it keeps U.S. Traditional Mass communities abreast of progress
and developments and publishes a directory of traditional Latin Masses available in the U.S. and Canada ($2.00 postpaid.) Its
May 31/94 newsletter includes the item Altar Girls (1) taken from the first issue of the Roman Rite (May, 1994.) One of its own
items is headed "Let's make our voices heard!" regarding disruptive changes being made to our Holy Mass. Another item reads:
"A Tridentine Mass is now authorized by Bishop John J. Myers every Sunday ... at 1.30 p.m. at St. Philomena Church, 3300 N.
Twelve Oaks Drive in Peoria (Ill.). Msgr. Rohifs, pastor, will be assisted by five other priests who will alternate in saying the
Mass. Three of them were ordained in the last 2 or 3 years and they are learning to say the Old Mass in Latin ... .

The Bishop in
a letter to the priests of his diocese said he was happy to give this permission, noting that the Holy Father asks that it be used
generously when requested. He adds: "In the city of Peoria a significant number of people have recently requested this Mass."

Substantial Unity (1): Article 38 of the Constitution on the Liturgy allows only changes to the Mass that preserve the "substantial
unity of the Roman Rite." This article is of vital importance, especially considering how extremists keep on pushing the
movement for liturgical reform into complete discontinuity with what the Mass has always been and must substantially remain.
The Traditional Mass movement strives to combat such disorder and, to this end, it helps to preserve the substantial unity of the
Roman Rite. What is substantial unity? Christ is an example of substantial unity between His two natures -divine and human.
There is also substantial
unity between the two constitutive parts of the human being: soul and body. Disease is a disruptive change in the human body
which can make it disintegrate to the point where it can no longer retain the soul. The substantial unity between soul and body is
then lost. No less an authority than Jungmann distinguishes between the soul and body of the Mass (cf. "The Mass of the
Roman Rite," Four Courts Press, Dublin, vol.1, p.20.) The soul of the Mass is Christ Himself continuing to do what He did at the
Last Supper. That is, He continues to offer Himself under the appearances of bread and wine. His sacrifice on the cross is
perpetually prolonged on the altar through time and space. He originated His Eucharistic sacrifice in the context of a meal. His
apostles obeyed His command: "Do this in remembrance of Me" in regard to His two consecratory acts, one of the bread at the
beginning of the meal and the other of the wine at the end. After a while, as Jungmann explains, they abandoned all that took
place between these two acts of Christ. This brought the consecratory acts together and gave greater emphasis to the
accompanying prayer of thanksgiving. This was not disruption but true development since what was essential, the thanksgiving
permeating the Jewish ceremonial meal, could be expressed without it. This change, says Jungmann, led to the original term,
breaking of bread, which mainly signified a meal (like the term "breakfast"), being replaced by the word Eucharist or prayer of
thanksgiving (ibid. p.21-22.) When soul and body are united, the latter is a living thing which grows organically as long as it
maintains its "substantive unity" with its soul. Disruptive or discontinuous change can imperil or destroy this substantial unity. It is
for this reason no doubt that article 23 of the Constitution on the Liturgy wisely stipulates that "any new forms adopted should in
some way grow organically from forms already
existing." The Roman Rite has embodied the soul of the Mass since the beginning of Christianity. Its Roman genius began to
develop when St. Peter was Bishop of Rome. This was claimed by early Popes. However it did not emerge as a rite distinct
from other rites (the Antiochan and Alexandrian) until the 4th century. It acquired its definitive or "normative" form under Pope
St Gregory (590-604.) It has grown in continuity with its original form down the ages until the Second Vatican Council. Article
38 of its Constitution on the Liturgy, together with article 23, is a warning that the unity between the soul of the Mass (Christ
Himself) and the Roman Rite which embodies this soul must not be destroyed by disruptive change. The liturgical establishment
needs to have this warning impressed on it in no uncertain terms. The Traditional Mass movement helps to keep the reformers
honest. In this respect it plays a very salutary role.

Altar Girls (3): According to The Catholic Register (April 23/94) the Vatican press spokesman Navarro-Valls declared: "the
decision (about altar girls) resolves a pastoral question, not a doctrinal one." On May 31,1993, he said it was "in no way
connected with the question of the ordained ministry." The Congregation of Divine Worship was studying this matter as far back
as 1980. In January of that year, its journal Notitiae included a study on altar girls. It was written by one of its own permanent
consultants, the prestigious liturgical scholar, Mgr. A. G. Martimort. He was member of the Conciliar Commission which drafted
the Constitution on the Liturgy and member of the Concilium appointed by Paul VI to implement it. His study reviews the whole
history of the Church's discipline excluding women from the service of the altar and from the sanctuary. The problem came to
the notice of the Church in the second century when Montanists in Phrygia introduced by fait accompli the practice of ordaining
women. The Council of Laodicea settled the matter towards the end of the 4th century with its Canon 44: "It is not fitting that
women approach
the altar."

Martimort shows how this position has been, throughout history, reiterated consistently until the Code of Canon Law of 1917 (can. 813, 2.) Martimort's study is juridical, not doctrinal, but he concludes that Church law excluded women from the
service of the altar, as well as from its vicinity in the sanctuary, mainly because the role of acolyte was considered as a
preliminary step towards priesthood. So underlying the law of the Church is a doctrinal position. To this he adds significantly: "All
this is confirmed by pastoral experience. The service of the altar ... provokes in children or adolescents the aspiration for the
priesthood. The material proximity of the altar evokes (in altar servers) a spiritual proximity, however difficult this may be to
explain" (p.15.) Martimort recommends that the question of girls serving the altar (disobediently introduced by fait accompli)
should not be studied apart from the doctrinal aspects. Martimort evidently confirms our calling into question the prudence of
dealing with the dubium on whether Canon Law excludes women from the service of the altar [cf Altar Girls (2)] before the
doctrinal dubium had been settled. To sum up: what justification is there for the laconic assertion twice made by the Vatican
press officer? Let us repeat: Martimort's study was juridical rather than doctrinal. Our next issue will refer to a study done by a
French theologian, Michel Sinoir, to which more than one bishop has called Rome's attention and which demonstrates cogently,
on sound doctrinal grounds, that women cannot be altar servers.

Whither the Mass? (1): In 1965, when still Bishop of Cracow, John Paul II showed he was bewildered about which direction the
liturgical reform would take, particularly in Africa. "Where will it end?" he asked, "Certainly we will preserve the basic elements,
the bread, the wine, but all else will be changed according to local tradition: words, gestures, colours, vestments, chants,
architecture, decor. The problem of liturgical reform is enormous ... " (Malinskl, Mon Ami, Karl Wojtyla, Paris, 1980, p.220.)

The Roman Rite is a supplement to the Precious Blood Banner P.O. Box 8100, Station T, Ottawa, Canada, KiG 3H6

Altar Girls (4): The constant tradition and rule of the Church throughout ages has hitherto been that women neither serve nor
approach the altar during Mass. For the altar has to do with the priesthood and hence with masculinity. The declaration of the
Holy See, Inter Insigniores dated Oct. 15,1976, and the apostolic letter of John Paul II, Ordinatio sacerdotalis dated May 30, 1994,
are negative: women cannot be priests. However, the former document proposes that the time has come to study more deeply
and explain more positively the role of women in the Church. A body of literature on this subject is beginning to appear. A
remarkable contribution to it, published by Tequi of Paris, has recently come from a French theologian, Fr. Michel Sinoir under
the title La Question de l'admission des femmes au sen'ice de l'autel ("The Question of the Admission of Women to the Service of the
Altar".) It was written at the request of a French diocesan bishop who immediately sent it to Rome. Other bishops asked that it
be published and so it was. Fr. Sinoir's preface is dated February 2,1994. So it must have been in the hands of the Congregation
of Divine Worship which, however, chose in effect to contradict it by stating through the Vatican Press Office that the altar girl
question as far as Rome is concerned has nothing to do with the priesthood. Likewise contradicted is the overwhelming
evidence that, throughout her history, the Church has constantly ruled against females being altar servers precisely because such
a role is normally regarded as an apprenticeship for the priesthood. Sinoir refers to the study by Mgr. Martimort which the
Congregation for Divine Worship itself published in its official gazette Notitiae, No.162, 1980 (cf. The Roman Rite, No.3, July,
1994.) Fr. Sinoir takes his cue from a statement of John Paul II in Mulieris dignitatem, no.26, that the Eucharist is above all the
sacramental act of Christ the Bridegroom redeeming His Bride, the
Church.

The role of women in the Church can only be grasped by looking closely at the plan of God for the creation and
redemption of mankind. After the disobedience of Adam and Eve, the obedience of the new Adam who is Christ the
Bridegroom and of the new Eve who is Mary, prototype of the Church as the Bride of Christ, fulfilled God's plan more
wonderfully than would have been possible otherwise. In a word, what God intended in creating man as male and female, and
what He accomplished in redeeming man, was a nuptial alliance. The duality of masculinity and femininity is essential to His
plan. In the divine mind, from all eternity, it has been decreed that there would not be one role to be played in the drama of
human salvation, but two roles, one masculine and the other feminine. The Bible opens and closes with the vision of the Woman
and the Child (Genesis 3 and Revelation 12.) The Son of God could not have become our priest and victim had not the Virgin of
Nazareth consented to be His mother and thus give Him the flesh and blood wherewith to be our priest and victim. And these
two roles are not interchangeable. Mary could no more be priest than Jesus could be mother. The cooperation of man that God
requires in order to bring about His eternal Kingdom is that masculinity and feminity reach their apex of achievement in
priesthood and motherhood respectively. The liturgy of the Church which Christ founded is based on this duality of roles. This
view is opposed by those whom Paul VI called "intemperate feminists" (Angelus of Jan. 30,1977) and who want men and
women to be, not complementary to each other, but com- petitive with each other. They regard the priesthood not as a humble
service but as a base for power and influence in the Church. Unfortunately there are misguided men who, contrary to the
express will of Christ, use the priesthood to lord it over the faithful. But the ordaining of would-be domineering females
to the priesthood is not the answer. The moral term for androgyny or unisexuality, which Feminists want to install in the Church,
is promiscuity. It would destroy the nuptial nature of the alliance between God and mankind which, first intimated in Genesis and
unfolding in the prophecies of Osiah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezechiel, Psalm 45, reaches lyrical and mystical heights of expression in
the Canticle of Canticles and stands fully revealed in the Gospel of Christ, the writings of St. Paul and the Apocalypse.

In
addition to the Scriptural proof of the nuptial alliance, Fr. Sinoir points out that the Church was defined as the Bride of Christ
twice in the dogmatic constitution Dei Filius of the First Vatican Council and evoked sixteen times in documents of Vatican II.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church devotes its section 796 to this concept. He adds statements of Popes (Pius XII, Paul VI and
John Paul II) which are consonant with this view of the mystery of the Church. Fr. Sinoir closes his study on this note:
"In reality, the Church has from the first reserved to the woman, after the example of her Founder and in imitation of Mary, a
role that is privileged and sublime as well as fundamental and indispensable: a role of intercession, of mediation and of
welcoming. But it is a role somewhat hidden, like the infant living in the mother. It is Mary's role since the beginning of the
Church, a role without which the priestly ministry would largely remain unfruitful."

Vernacularland (1): The greatest success of the Second Vatican Council is supposed to be the revised rite of the Mass. But in
contravention of the Council's Constitution on the Liturgy (art. 36.) the revisers totally vernacularized the Mass. It should be
called the devised, not the revised, rite. We mean, devised by the disobedient. Yet the Holy Mass is about our Lord being
obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. The faithful never complained of semantic difficulties when Mass was
celebrated in Latin. Hand missals had Latin on one side and English on the other. They understood perfectly the Kyrie
Eleison, Gloria, Credo, Sanctus and Agnus Dei which they were often encouraged to sing themselves. On the other hand, the
semantic difficulties in the postconciliar period have been unending. The latest crisis to erupt in Vernacularland has been that of
the English edition of the new Catechism of the Catholic Church. The text submitted by the American Bishops to the Holy See had
to be entirely rejected. Moreover in the corrected translation which the Holy See provided, the English excerpts from the Roman
Missal taken from the ICEL version, were retranslated. In an article entitled Vatican corrects ICEL, we read: "The Vatican
decision to retranslate passages from the Roman Missal suggests a remarkable lack of confidence in what ICEL has rendered"
(The Catholic World Report, June, 1994, p.40.) Let us note that it was the Congregation of Divine Worship which originally
approved the ICEL translation of the Roman Missal. Now the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, which is in charge of
the Catechism, has found it necessary to correct the ICEL translation. Obviously the Holy See is now as disunited as the rest of
the Church. Alice would be as bewildered in Vernacularland as she was in Wonderland. Behind the failure of the ICEL to
produce, in the three decades of its existence, a satisfactory English translation of the Mass now looms the failure of the
Consilium, the body of experts appointed in 1964 by Paul VI to revise the Roman Rite. Competent linguistic scholars have found
guidelines for translators issued by the Consilium in 1969 to be gravely deficient. More about this story in our next.

Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (1): The latest newsletter #25 of this society, authorized by Rome to train priests for the ancient
Latin Mass, announces: "After three years of establishing our presence in the United States, we are now able to open a full-
fledged seminary in America in the diocese of Scranton, PA." Deo Gratias! To receive their newsletter write to:
Griffin Rd., P0 Box 196, Elmhurst, PA 18416.

The Roman Rite is a supplement to the Precious Blood Banner
P.O. Box 8100, Station T, Ottawa, Canada, KiG 3H6

Altar girls (5): Inside the Vatican of May, 1994, published statements of Navarro-Valls and Lessi-Ariosto, the former being in
charge of the Vatican Press Office and the latter implicated in the drafting of the Divine Worship decision on altar girls.
Navarro-Valls insists vehemently that the altar girl question has nothing to do with that of the priesthood: "One must not blow
things up out of all proportion, in a stupid way, in a distorting way.... I know that some people have blown the problem up out of
proportion and want this problem to be seen as a very important doctrinal one.... The priesthood is a theme which has nothing to
do, nothing, with altar girls. Nothing, either directly or indirectly.... It is a small matter that only extremists would blow up out of
proportion, either in a positive or a negative way." Lessi-Ariosto speaks in the same vein, "The profound (sic!) reasons that led to
this decision were that Church practice had begun to allow women to do certain things more important than carrying the cruets
or incense during Mass. ... Therefore, it seemed absurd that the lesser types of service, like serving at the altar, were to be
prohibited ... In all this, there is no question whatsoever of a step toward the ordination of women, and not even a step toward
allowing women to become acolytes. They will not become acolytes."

What they are doing is trivializing the question by
restricting it to the functional aspect: a girl can function in the sanctuary like a boy. They leave aside what is crucially important,
namely the ontological aspect (i.e. that of being): a girl cannot be what a boy can be. On the one hand, we have a Tweedledum
who claims that the altar girl question is "a small matter" unrelated to the priesthood. On the other, we have a Tweedledee who
minimizes what girl servers do and are. They can function as, but cannot be, acolytes. The cat is out of the bag and it is the
Cheshire cat with its trick of fading into nothing
but a smile. It is significant, indeed numinous, that a boy serve in the sanctuary because ipso facto he is oriented towards being an
acolyte and, beyond that, towards the priesthood. On the contrary, insignificant and ominous is the situation of a girl server. She
is a nonentity functioning in a state of vacuity. Her actions do not correspond to what she is, ontologically speaking. Altar girls
have no reason for being except to smile. The indignity of it all may dawn on them as they grow up. What then? Hell hath no
fury than a woman scorned! Tweedledum and Tweedledee fatuously insist that those who object are making much ado about
nothing. But that is precisely the point. It angers people to see nothingness introduced into the sanctuary where only momentous
reality should be found:
the reality of the presence of our Saviour, of His salvation and of His grace. For young boys to take part in the proceedings
commanded by our Lord at the Last Supper is of an importance that should bar anyone from introducing any triviality
whatsoever. Nothing should be allowed to make boy servers less likely to be oriented towards the priesthood.. Little girls on the
other hand deserve better than to be disoriented.

Congregationalism (1): The question arises as to whether the present liturgical reform tends to give the congregation (or
assembly) an inordinate role in Catholic worship, thus relegating priest and rite to the background. Congregationalism has hitherto
been a term applied to a style of Protestantism which has no room for priest or rite. Mgr Francis Mannion, Rector of the
Cathedral in Salt Lake City, writes in the June 1994 Newsletter of the Fellowship of Catholic Scholars: "In the congregationalist
outlook, ritual forms are regarded as the product, creation and property of the congregation.... Similarly, ordained ministry... is
regarded as a function or extension of the
general ministry of the congregation.... In my opinion, the congregationalist trend represents possibly the most serious danger
today to the integrity of Catholic liturgical life and to the ongoing renewal of the church."

Vernacularland (2): The International Commission on English in the Liturgy (ICEL) failed last year to get the American bishops
to approve their new translation of the Lectionary which addressed God as Father and Mother. Much credit for this goes to
priests banded into a society called CREDO which is "dedicated to the faithful translation of the Liturgy." Its address is P.O.
Box 7004, Arlington, Virginia, 22207. CREDO commissioned a group of scholars to evaluate thoroughly "The Instruction on
Translation of Liturgical Texts" issued in French on January 25, 1969, by the Consilium or committee mandated by Paul VI to
implement the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy of Vatican II. The scholars found serious defects in this document and offered
their own "Proposed Liturgical Translation Standards." CREDO sent their guidelines, together with their critique of those of the
Consilium to the American bishops' meeting in June, 1994. CREDO also sent both their documents to the Holy See. They are
published in the Catholic World Report, July, 1994.

St. Michael the Archangel (1): In 1884, Pope Leo XIII composed a prayer imploring St. Michael the Archangel to defend the
Church "in the day of battle" and ordered it to be recited everywhere after every Low Mass. This was his response to the
intense Satanic onslaught which he saw culminating against the Church at the close of the 19th century. The postconciliar
reformers put an end to this prayer. Its suppression was evidently premature given that Pope John Paul II is convinced that the
same satanic onslaught which Leo XIII perceived is worse than ever. He now asks everyone "to recite it (the prayer to St.
Michael) to obtain help in the battle against the forces of darkness and against the spirit of this world." He first
made this appeal when beatifying Gianna Molla on April 24 of this year. Gianna was the Italian mother who died in 1962, shortly
after giving birth. She refused the operation necessary to save her life for fear it would be fatal to the child she was carrying.
Being herself a medical doctor, specialized in pediatrics, she was well aware of her situation. Besides invoking St. Michael, John
Paul II referred to the glorious vision in Revelation (Chap. XII) of the Woman menaced by Satan intent on destroying the Child
to which she is about to give birth. John Paul II said: "When all the threats against life gather before the woman who is about to
give birth, we must turn to the woman clothed with the sun, so that... she may protect every human being threatened in his or her
mother's womb."

The Klaus Gamber critique (1): Radical changes to the Roman Rite made by postconciliar liturgical reformers have undergone a
very thorough critical scrutiny on the part of the late Klaus Gamber, eminent German historian of both Eastern and Western
liturgy. He maintains that these changes correspond little with what the Fathers of the Council intended. Two of the three
Cardinal Prefects of the Doctrine of the Faith who have held office since the Council can be said to concur in the judgment of
Mgr Klaus Gamber. Of his studies comprising 361 titles, about two hundred pages have been translated into English and
published under the title of The Reform of the Roman Liturgy by the Foundation for Catholic Reform, P.O. Box 255, Harrison, N.Y.,
10528, ($19.95 US.) In a preface, Bishop Karl Braun of Eichstatt, Germany, says, "Because of his comprehensive and detailed
studies of the liturgy, the late Klaus Gamber was able to raise a number of issues about the disturbing changes in our modern
liturgy. ... In his critical analysis of the situation we now have to face, the author was not afraid to take issue with many troubling
developments." Beginning with the next issue, we will summarize various points made by Mgr Klaus Gamber in that part of his
critique so far translated into English.

The Roman Rite is a supplement to the Precious Blood Banner P.O. Box 8100, Station T, Ottawa, Canada, KiG 3H6

The Klaus Gamber critique (2): A selection of writings by the late Mgr Klaus Gamber, were translated from German into French
and published in two small volumes under the titles: La Reforme liturgique en question and Vers le Seigneur. Translated into English,
they have now appeared in a single volume entitled: The Reform of the Roman Liturgy. A preface to the latter written by Abbot
Gerard Calvet of the Benedictine monastery of Le Barroux, France, calls attention to three major themes of the Gamber critique,
the first of which he outlines in these terms: "Since the Council, we have witnessed a break in tradition. Instead of a
homogeneous and harmonious development of the rites, as was always the case until then, a manufactured liturgy has been
established." Cardinal Ratzinger, to whom Gamber was a friend as well as an esteemed scholar, uses more startling words in a
preface he has contributed to the first of the French works: "Instead of continuity in developing (the rite), they produced a
manufactured liturgy. Leaving aside the living process of growth... they embarked on another, that of fabrication." And the
Cardinal goes even further. What they did, he said, is "a falsification." Hence he calls into question the probity of conduct as well
as the work of the forty experts mandated by Paul VI in 1964 to implement the changes required by the Constitution on the
Liturgy of Vatican II. This body was the famous Consilium, with Cardinal Lercaro as president and Annibale Bugnini as
secretary. It was terminated in 1969 and its mandate transferred to a new Congregation of Divine Worship, created ad hoc with
Bugnini still in the saddle as secretary. Lercaro, however, was dropped. He had been the object of severe criticism because of
the manner in which he envisaged his responsibility. In a discourse on August 25,1969, he clearly indicated that he did not
consider himself bound by the letter of the
Constitution on the Liturgy. In effect, he replaced the Council with the Consilium as the arbiter of the direction that liturgical
reform should take (cf. 3ODAYS, No.3, 1993, p.42.)

Here we see politics, not scholarship, at work within the Consilium. The
mandates both of Bugnini himself and of his Congregation were summarily terminated in July, 1975, following a stormy meeting
of a large number of Cardinals of the Roman Curia. It is obvious from Bugnini's own 900-page defence of the honesty of his
stewardship, posthumously published under the title La Riforma Liturgica in 1983, that both his Consilium and his short-lived
Congregation had a turbulent existence, apparently because they were conducted as entities independent of, and continually at
odds with, the rest of the Holy See. After the fall of Bugnini, jurisdiction over the Liturgy was restored to the original
Congregation of Rites set up in the 16th century, and from which no doubt it should never have been removed. This political
background to the postconciliar reform must be kept in mind when any critique of its performance is considered, especially one
as serious as that of Klaus Gamber. His study is confined to a purely scholarly critique of texts, with no reference to the political
turmoil in which Bugnini's Consilium and Congregation were involved during the eleven years of their combined existence, 1964-
1975. But Gamber does bring out the extraordinary fact that has escaped notice so far, namely that the Consilium made not one
but two starts from scratch of its task of revising the Roman Rite. One of these was bad and the other good. As to which is
which, that depends whether the matter is judged in a political or scholarly perspective. The first start culminated in a new text
of the Mass published on January 27,1965 (cf The New Litu~gy, 1903-1965, Herder & Herder, New York, 1966, pp.574-614.)
Gamber considers this
as a good start because it was faithful to the demands of the Constitution of Vatican II that the changes be of an organic nature,
consonant with the nature of the Roman Rite as a living organism. This is his scholarly judgement. But apparently the new
"normative Mass" of 1965 was politically considered as a bad start. By whom? No doubt by a personage or personages powerful
enough to order that it be scrapped. In any event, a second start from scratch was made which culminated in the entirely
different "normative Mass" published together with a General Instruction and accompanied by a letter of promulgation by Paul VI
dated April 3, 1969.

This was considered a bad start, not only by Gamber but by no less a personage than Cardinal Ottaviani,
Prefect of the Sacred Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith. And his opposition was on doctrinal grounds. In fact, this Mass
of 1969 had to be republished with an amended General Instruction a year later. That was an admission that it was a bad start.
When Cardinal Ratzinger, the present prefect of the S.C. of the Doctrine of Faith, says "they left aside" the process of normal
organic development "and embarked" on another process (of fabrication and falsification), he refers to these two starts that the
Consilium made, the first good and the second bad, according to him.

Altar Girls (6): When it was pointed out to Navarro-Valls, Vatican information officer, that the decision to approve altar girls is
seen as a break with previous Church tradition, he argued that on the contrary it is not "an innovation." It is a case, he said, of a
"correct, more exact interpretation of an existing Church law" (cf Inside the Vatican, May, 1994, p. 14.) No evidence is
forthcoming of a canonical or liturgical nature as to its correctness and exactitude. The canonists who made this interpretation
had no explanation to offer. They probably deemed it as "politically correct" but would not admit it. The practice of altar girls is
certainly an innovation, considering that it
destroys a tradition extending over two millennia that women must not even enter the sanctuary, let alone serve at the altar. The
only way it is not an innovation is in respect to its past twenty years of scandalous existence as a fait accompli.

Stability of ancient Roman Rite (1): Benedictine monks make a vow of stability, that is, to remain in the monastery which they
have chosen. Consequently a Benedictine monastery is a very stable environment. It is a matter of great consolation therefore
that the ancient Roman Rite enjoys this stability in the several French Benedictine monasteries where it is to be found. Whereas
most Traditional Mass communities are in a precarious situation, subject to all sorts of vexations and vicissitudes, the monastery
affords a stability and a prospect of steady growth and a bright future which, in turn, will help the more unstable lay communities
to persevere and overcome their problems. Besides stability, the ancient Roman Rite in a monastic environment is assured of
growth and development. The most noteworthy of the Benedictine monasteries which are a haven of stability and growth for
the traditional Roman Rite is that of Le Barroux, not far from Avignon in south-eastern France. It has been the subject of an
extensive report in 3ODays magazine (No. 6,1994, pp.28-34.) The monks of Le Barroux number fifty-five at present, their
median age being 30. They have recently completed the building of their splendid Romanesque monastery, of which the
corner stone was laid in 1980. Beginning with a single monk in 1970, they grew to a dozen within a year or so, at which time
they were lodged in the ruins of a small, 12th century monastery. Word about this community dedicated to the ancient Latin
Mass spread through France and beyond. New aspirants kept coming and many thousands of the faithful eagerly began to
contribute the money necessary to build. The monks have made a new printing of the 1962 Roman Missal of which they have so
far sold 20,000 copies.

The Roman Rite is a supplement to the Precious Blood Banner P.O. Box 8100, Station T, Ottawa, Canada, KiG 3H6

From priests to presiders (1): The new liturgy
or Novus Ordo as it is commonly called is very prolific in producing married deacons, extraordinary ministers and periti (people
who know better than their grandmothers how to pray) but is very short of priests. The U.S. Bishops' documentary service
Origins, Volumes 1 to 23, (1970-1993) has indexed 150 references under the heading of "Priest shortage." The Church of
Quebec, once the most vigorous and flourishing of any church in North or South America, is now in a state of utter collapse.
This is admitted by its bishops in their recent document entitled Risquer l'avenir ("Risking the future".) Most of their priests,
reduced to half of what they were at the close of the Second Vatican Council, are in their declining years. Half of the few
ordained since Vatican II have not persevered. The U.S. episcopate commissioned a demographic study for the years 1966-
2005 from a sociologist of the University of Wisconsin named Schoenherr, an ex-priest. Published on Sept. 6,1990, it reveals that
forty years after the close of the Second Vatican Council (1965), the clergy will have declined forty percent and the survivors
for the most part will be elderly. The Bishops of Wisconsin have recently issued a joint pastoral lefter, dated Sept. 26/94, with
the title Making do with Less: Sunday Service without a priest. However the priestless parishes will not be without presiders. The
question being agitated is, will married deacons whose training is limited to once-a-week evening courses be preferred over
women who take full university courses in theology? The latter are being told not to worry. Their greater competence will win
the day. The Novus Ordo will have few priests. But there will be plenty of presiders, female as well as male.

Wild Masses (2): Our first item under this heading (Issue 2) gave an example of this phenomenon which has plagued the
postconciliar church from the beginning. This item will
describe how it began. By "wild" is meant out of control of the Holy See or the Bishops. This wildness can be said to have begun
in the late 1960's with an agitation to set aside the Roman Canon (main part of the Roman Rite) in favour of alternative
Eucharistic Prayers. Paul VI thought he could hold the line by authorizing three new canons to be added to the new Roman
Missal of 1970. To no avail. A year later, there were two hundred other Eucharistic Prayers published and in use. The French
term
- messes sauvages (wild masses) - is apt because they proliferate out of control. The Holy See countered with a circular letter to
Episcopal Conferences, dated April 27, 1973, reaffirming that only four Eucharistic Prayers are permitted for universal use. But
as a conciliatory gesture, the letter stated that a request for a Eucharistic Prayer for occasional and special use would receive
sympathetic consideration. This concession proved to be a Trojan horse. The Swiss Bishops submitted a rite with a Lutheran-
style epiclesis invoking the Holy Spirit to bring about, not that bread and wine be changed into the body and blood of Christ, but
that Christ become present in an unspecified manner. Approval of this Swiss Mass was signed in July, 1974, by Bugnini whom
Paul VI made the chief artisan of his reform. The Swiss Mass proliferated wildly because of its ecumenical appeal into twenty-
seven countries on three continents, plus the Phillipines and French Canada. It was incorporated into five missals as Eucharistic
Prayer V as if it were approved for constant and general use. In 1991, the Holy See withdrew approval but did not demand
immediate cessation of this "wild mass."

It issued a corrected Latin text to which future translations must conform. But it failed
to order episcopal conferences to cease using the erroneous texts. The Holy See has evidently lost control of the situation. The
Chicago "wild mass" (cf Issues 2 & 8) shows the U.S. Bishops have lost control.
Pope Paul VI (1): An account of the life and
work of Giovanni Battista Montini has been written by Yves Chiron who, although still in his early thirties, has already
established a solid reputation as a biographer and historian. His title Paul VI, Le Pape ecartele, (Paris, 1993) indicates the Montini
pope as "torn apart." The apostle Paul, under the aegis of whose name Montini placed his pontificate, himself confessed to being
torn apart: "For I do not do the good I want; but the evil I do not want is what I do" (Romans, 7:19.) But Chiron shows Paul VI
as torn apart by exterior forces, that is, the repercussions on himself of the forces of change which began to split the Church
apart during his pontificate. The enormous mental suffering he endured in consequence could well have been a cross which
sanctified him. In fact the cause of his canonisation has been initiated. But it can be asked if the suffering of Paul VI was not, to
a large extent, self-inflicted by his grandiose as well as ill-fated endeavour to establish a new style of Catholic worship in which
tradition would be fused with the anti-traditional mentality called modernity. However good his intentions may have been, the
Church was torn asunder. In the course of 1972, Paul VI lamented that "the smoke of Satan" was emanating from a fissure in
the sanctuary (cf. p. 320.) No doubt he succeeded nobly in upholding the traditional truths of Catholic Faith and morals. But the
field of liturgy, wherein Paul VI principally deployed his energies, became a scene of devastation. From Chiron's portrayal of
Montini emerges a passionate advocate of radical liturgical reform who consorted, decades before the Council, with reformers
as radical as himself (pp.181-182; 254-259.) The question is:
how radical? Ultra radical to the extent that, if they got their hands on the Roman Rite they would eradicate rather than revise
it? When Paul VI banded them into a Consilium to which he gave unlimited power to change the Roman Rite, the first thing they
did was to eliminate to a large extent its most substantial part, the Canon, by making it compete with three non-
Roman canons introduced as alternatives to be used without restriction. Once the Roman Canon became optional, it became
exceptional. Yet the Constitution on the Liturgy of Vatican II stipulated (art. 28) that 'tthe substantial unity of the Roman Rite"
must be safeguarded. Hitherto it has been presumed that Paul VI intended to do no more than implement the provisions of the
Constitution on the Liturgy. He named Cardinal Lercaro and Fr. Bugnini as President and Secretary respectively of the
committee of implementation called the Consilium. That he lost confidence in Lercaro (dismissed in 1969) and in Bugnini
(dismissed in 1975) could indicate that he reproached them for having gone too far in their radicalness.

But the portrait that Yves
Chiron depicts makes one wonder if Paul VI himself was not responsible for causing the rift between what the Council intended
and what actually happened. In deciding that the Roman Rite be revised, the Council certainly did not intend that it be uprooted
from the soil of the tradition which nourishes it. Chiron speaks of "the new Mass" (p.289) of Paul VI being presented on May 2,
1969, in the terms of article 7 of its General Instruction which put it quite at variance with "the traditional definition of the Mass
as renewal of the sacrifice of the Cross" (p.291.) The presence of Christ was referred to in terms more Protestant than
Catholic. As for an explanation of this utterly strange debut of Paul Vi's Mass, there seems to be only that indicated by Mgr
Martimort (close associate of Bugnini) thus: "Nothing at all was decided - even less promulgated -without Paul VI's knowledge.
He received all the drafts and annotated them by hand in order to show his preferences, exigences and refusals, and this to the
point of sometimes causing veritable crises (p 254.) Chiron's sources are persons such as Jean Guitton in whom Paul VI
confided as well as some close collaborators. His investigation is thorough and there is no escaping the question as to why and to
what extent the radical reformer in Paul VI went beyond what was intended by Vatican II.

The Roman Rite is a supplement to the Precious Blood Banner P.O. Box 8100, Station T, Ottawa, Canada KiG 3H6

The Klaus Gamber critique (3): In Issue 6 (Oct. '94) we began to consider the Klaus Gamber critique of the current
liturgical reform, of which three fundamental themes can be discerned. The first of these, outlined in Issue 6, is that the
Roman Rite is a living organism. Therefore, change should be organic, not artificial or fabricated. In this issue, we look at
the second theme of his critique which is that the Roman Rite normally requires that the priest face the Lord not the people.
His basic stance is, as Gamber puts it, versus Dominum not versus populum. What is normal is that both priest and people
orient themselves towards the Lord. This is traditionally done, wherever possible, by facing eastwards. Ideally, the abside is
oriented towards the east, that is, towards the rising sun which symbolizes the risen Lord. Apart from his basic stance, the
priest turns towards the people at intervals with the gesture and words of Dominus vobiscum. He also turns to them to
explain the Gospel and to distribute holy communion. Gamber finishes this part of his critique by warning that the
consequences of reversing the direction of the Mass will be grave. If the Roman Rite is essentially structured towards the
Lord (this being signified, if possible, by designing the church so that priest and people face eastward), to destroy this
orientation can only have a detrimental effect on the Roman Rite as a whole. Instead of the Roman Rite being revised
(which is all that the postconciliar reformers are mandated to do), it is ravaged. Mgr. Gamber did not live to see the full
consequences of what for him was a radical disorientation of the Roman Rite. But it is now becoming evident that the
practice of the priest being turned habitually, instead of occasionally, towards the people is creating a situation of the
congregation becoming too engrossed in itself. Catholic worship is gravitating towards Congregationalism or that form of
Protestant worship
where the priesthood is eclipsed. (cf Issue 5.)

Mystery and morale (1): The recent death of
Albert Decourtray, Archbishop of Lyons, Cardinal and Primate of France, prompts us to include this item. Mystere et
morale was the title of an editorial he wrote for his diocesan paper Eglise a Lyon, May 5, 1992. It is about a postconciliar
mood which inclines Catholics to be so preoccupied with how they act towards each other as to neglect to approach God
adoringly in his Mystery. Decourtray calls attention to this phenomenon as a double deviation. On the one hand, liturgy
consists of "the faith community" or church assembly being narcissistically focused on itself rather than on the Lord. This
deviation is combined with a second whereby, instead of Catholics being prompted by the theological virtues to believe and
hope in God and love Him as well as our neighbor for His sake, God is relegated to the background, the focus being on
fellow members of the Church. The attitude is: what does it matter to have faith in God if you love others? What does it
matter to hope in heaven if you work for a better future here below? What does it matter to love God if you help your
neighbors? Hence the Cardinal's title: "Mystery and Morale." Instead of an elan upwards to the mystery of God, there is the
horizontalism of being sociable. One's eyes fix on the people instead of rising to God. Cardinal Decourtray begins: "After
twenty-five years of applying conciliar reforms, would it not be as well to take stock Faire le point?? Can we dare accept
the hypothesis that this great movement, so beneficial in itself, might partly be at fault?" The two deviations reinforce each
other.

One is a sort of laicized morality (even tending towards atheism or agnosticism) which invades the minds of
Catholics. The other is a mood of practical oblivion of the Mystery of the infinite holiness
of God manifested most of all in the liturgy.
"We are turned so much towards the assembly that we often forget to turn ourselves together, people and priests, towards
God! Yet, without this essential orientation, the celebration no longer has any Christian meaning." (Cf. Documentation
catholique, Paris, 21/6/1992, p.613.)
Inculturation (1): The Roman Liturgy and inculturation is the title of the Fourth Instruction for!
the implementation of the Constitution on the Liturgy, issued by the Congregation for Divine Worship on March 4,1994. It
has to do with the Constitution's articles 3740. The previous three Instructions (Sep. 26/64, May 4/67 and Sep.
5/70) concerned other parts of the Constitution.
The purpose of Articles 37 to 40 is to provide for "an even more radical adaptation of the liturgy" (art. 38.) Divine Worship
prefers the word "inculturation" to "adaptation." It is fairly easy to understand what "adaptation" means. "Inculturation" is a
word that requires extensive erudition and thus increases the importance of "experts" who already dominate excessively the
liturgical scene. Here we will limit the question to what adaptation or inculturation means according to article 38. The idea it
conveys is that the more radical this or that change is, the better adapted or inculturated the liturgy becomes. Examples of
what "experts" put forth as necessary adaptations to modern culture are altar girls, dancing girls, inclusive language which
excludes God the Father, clown masses and the like. What they say is that the more Catholic worship undergoes such
radical changes, the better it will be. Theoretically, article 38 puts a limit on being radical. The change in question must not
impair "the substantial unity of the Roman Rite."

Practically speaking, however, experience has shown that reformers who
are encouraged to be ever "more radical" are inclined to throw off all restraint. Radical comes from the Latin radix meaning
"root." Normally it means "renewal by the roots" but with extremists it comes to mean "uprooting" as in tornado. The first
use of article 40 was to
negate art. 36 which stipulates that Latin must continue to be the language of the liturgy. To allow one article to nullify
another in a legislative document is to make it useless in exercising any restraint. Article 40 also permits committees to
indulge in experimental changes. This nullifies the requirement of article 23 that change be organic, not fabricated. The
ultimate effect of the misuse of article 40 is that the Constitution cannot provide a form or ideal whereby it can guide the
liturgical reform.
Reform without form becomes anarchy. What
the Constitution on the Liturgy envisages is the revision, not eradication, of the Roman Rite.
Eventually, as Cardinal Ratzinger has said, a reform of the current liturgical reform will have to be undertaken. The first task
will be to reinterpret articles 37-40 concerning adaptation so that they can no longer be used so recklessly.

Wild masses (3): The annual "wild mass" of the assembly known as Call to Action took place on Nov. 6th, 1994, at
Chicago. Our issue No.2 describes the 1993 version. This year there were 3100 concelebrants including about 300 priests
and 1000 nuns. All wore stoles. There were ten presiders including Sr. Joan Chittister who preached, Fr. William Calahan,
a deacon and his wife, a "resigned" priest, and a member of the Dignity gay and lesbian group. The general assembly of
U.S. Bishops, also held in November, neglected as usual to issue a Call to Order.

Altar girls (7): Whether bishops permit or prohibit girls to serve at the altar, they are required to explain to the people the
reason for whatever they decide. The Bishop of Arlington, Virginia, has decided that boys only can serve at the altar in
parish and mission churches, as well as at elementary and high schools. Girls are restricted to serving the altar in chapels
(colleges, convents, retreat houses, hospitals and nursing homes) as well as at home Masses. The reason given for retaining
"the traditional norm of male altar servers" is because 85% of the priests of Arlington diocese were formerly altar servers.

The Roman Rite is a supplement to the Precious Blood Banner P.O. Box 8100, Station T, Ottawa, Canada, KiG 3H6

Trying to be pastoral though peevish (1): The
American episcopate has published in its documentary service Origins a pastoral letter, dated Dec. 5, 1994, written by
Bishop David Thompson of Charleston, S.C. It is the good bishop's response to "letter-writing campaigns" and "spurious
appeals" urging him to be generous in allowing people to worship according to the Roman Missal of 1962 instead of that of
1970. Such efforts "have raised serious questions in my mind," he says. Nonetheless he cannot stifle his pastoral solicitude
for those who find it "difficult or impossible" to be deprived of "the pre-Vatican II Latin Mass." So he tries to put
peevishness aside and set forth a pastoral policy. The fact that the U.S. Bishops have decided to make public the mind of
Bishop Thompson on this matter presumably indicates that they want to change their policy as a whole which hitherto has
been one of silence. Bravo! Better the angel of dialogue than the devil of dumbness!

Notwithstanding that the words of
Bishop Thompson are quite irascible, let us rejoice that his fellow bishops make his voice sound through their collegial
oracle called Origins. Even though ostracism thus gives way to criticism, it is refreshing to have their admission that it is
dumb on their part not to dialogue. As
G. K. Chesterton said, the irate squire who furiously brandished a carving knife in hot pursuit of his butler showed more
humanity to the fellow than if he had ignored his existence. Annoyed though Bishop Thompson evidently is, he does his best
to speak with accents more pastoral than peevish. Actually the procedure he proposes for petitioners is laid out along lines
more pathological than pastoral. However, the patients are encouraged to put forth their views and are promised a hearing.

First, they must have recourse to the guidance of their parish priest who can be counted on to be sympathetic and
considerate. He will try to lead them gently
through the agony of withdrawal from their addiction to the immemorial Mass. If this fails, both they and the pastor are to
write him letters describing how, in spite of sincere efforts to overcome their peculiar propensity to worship in the way that
grandpa and grandma did, it is all to no avail. Now it is the bishop's turn to agonize over the question: "whether approval of
the request would compromise his efforts to promote the reform of Vatican II throughout the diocese?" The most useful
aspect of Bishop Thompson's effort is that, in revealing his mind, he also reveals his misunderstanding of those whom he
both chides and cajoles. The problem which he poses to himself in effect is this: if the Mass which has endured for two
millennia spreads into the third millennium, will it not jeopardize the liturgical reform mandated by the Second Vatican
Council? The answer is: not in the least. What will happen is that the Roman Catholic Church will have two rites (Roman
and New) in her third millennium just as she had two rites in the first millennium (Roman and Gallican.) This will not worry
the Fathers of Vatican II. What is more likely to make them turn over in their graves is the discrepancy between what they
intended and what has actually happened. This also explains why people persist in petitioning for the old rite. Promoters of
the Traditional Latin Mass do not intend to call into question the reform set forth in the Constitution on the Liturgy of
Vatican II. Their concern is that the failure of the reformers to abide by this Constitution imperils authentic liturgical reform.
This is the position of the German liturgical scholar, Mgr. Klaus Gamber which has been adopted by the Traditional Mass
movement in general. By contravening key articles of the Constitution on the Liturgy, the reformers have robbed this
document of its formative and normative function. This leaves them without a form or
norms to guide their work of liturgical reform. It is good therefore to retain the ancient Roman Rite as the Norm of
Tradition to deter those who would otherwise push the liturgical reform into complete discontinuity with what the Mass has
always been and must substantially remain.

Vernacularland (3): Lodged in our memory is a
French television program we turned on when staying in Montreal about ten or fifteen years ago. A French lady was
speaking of her experience in talking about Christianity in Algeria to a Moslem audience. She noticed in the front row a
distinguished gentleman listening to her with rapt attention. When she finished, he came forward and said to her, through
another man who was his interpreter, "I do not know the French language but I understood what you were saying. For you
speak with the accents of faith." During the millennium and a half that Holy Mother the Church used Latin as her sacred
language, she was understood by all and sundry because she spoke with the accents of faith. Is she understood now that
she speaks in the vernacular? Alas, this is far from always being the case. Some years ago, we read somewhere about what
has happened in the State of Bangalore in India. How many languages are spoken in India? Fifteen official languages and
250 local languages? Some such statistic has stuck in our mind.

In any event, it seems that the Catholics of Bangalore
speak Tamil. But the ruling clique in Bangalore speaks Kanata and imposes it on the whole state, even on the Catholic
Church. The result has been riots and bloodshed amongst the Catholics. We gather that Kanata is not spoken with the
accents of faith in Bangalore. We are not in touch yet with the Traditional Mass movement in India but we understand it
exists and quite vigorously. No wonder! We know of an English priest fluent in French who began to say Holy Mass in
English when it became vernacularized. When he said Mass before a congregation, say on Sunday, he found he could
forget the language and think of the people instead. But when he tried to
celebrate alone in his private oratory, he found it impossible to say Mass in English because of its execrable quality. So he
said it in French as he found it better. That is, until he noticed that the French translation of consubstantialis in the Nicene
Creed had heretically been translated as "of the same nature as" instead of "consubstantial." The Nicene Creed is not
pronounced in French with the accents of faith. Jacques Maritain wrote a letter to Paul VI in 1965 pointing this out in no
uncertain terms but nothing was ever done. The French are still using the Arian instead of the Catholic creed. Eventually the
priest in question was able to purchase the four volumes of the Novus Ordo in Latin, and that solved the problem at least
until he could obtain the privilege to revert to the Roman Rite Missal of 1962. It may be argued whether or not the Catholic
Faith suffers from the contravening of art. 36 of the Constitution on the Liturgy which stipulates that Latin must continue to
be the language of the Mass. But the Faith certainly suffers from the refusal on the part of translators to render the Latin text
faithfully. Vernacularisers, deprived of the reliability of the Latin, fail to distinguish between true faith and false ideology.
Before Vatican II, the faithful were provided with accurate translations of the Latin prayers in their hand missals. They were
printed by private publishers who, because they believed that mediocrity and inaccuracy would be bad for business, took
care that translations be the work of genius. Bishops are now themselves producers and distributors of liturgical books.
This is a multi-million dollar industry in Canada. Instead of entrusting the work of translation to a genius, they give it to a
committee which not only wallows in mediocrity but shows a penchant to yield to ideological pressure such as that of the
Feminist movement. Thus both ideology as well as banality flourish in Vernacularland. This is bad for the Faith but not for
business because the bishops make the translations, bad as they are, obligatory and thus force Holy Mother the Church to
speak with the accents of Mammon.

The Roman Rite is a supplement to the Precious Blood Banner P.O. Box 8100, Station T, Ottawa, Canada, KiG 3H6

Chapter of errors (1): In his letter of pro~ mulgation of April 3, 1969, Paul VI presented his missal as the fruit of four
centuries of liturgical studies and of a century of liturgical reform. Nevertheless this initiative was gravely marred. No doubt
Divine Providence will see that what was done will end up by being beneficial to the Church. In the meantime, honesty
demands that it be acknowledged that up to now this new chapter in the history of the Mass is one of errors. The recent
rampaging of rivers through northern Europe began with torrents cascading from high places in the Alps. In 1965, the
movement of liturgical reform ceased making its way peacefully through the Church and became an uncontrollable flood let
loose from high places in Rome. However, those appointed by the Pope to assist him as guardians of the Faith did not fall
to raise the alarm over the excesses of liturgical reformers and their "crash program" mentality. All three Cardinal Prefects
of the Doctrine of the Faith holding office during this postconciliar period have called into question the wisdom of changes
inaugurated by the Holy See. While Cardinals Ottaviani and Ratzinger have been outspoken in this respect, not so Seper.
He followed Ottaviani as prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith. More preoccupied with protecting the
reputation of Paul VI than with the errors in the General Instruction appended in 1969 to the new Pauline version of the
Roman Missal, Seper brushed aside the strong protest that his predecessor made against the said errors. Nonetheless, it
appears that he too had serious reservations about the Second Eucharistic Prayer. We will save this for a future item.

Congregationalism (2): This postconciliar
mentality, emphasizing the worshipping assembly at the expense of the role of the priest, first manifested itself in article 7 of
the General Instruction of the Novus Ordo promulgated on
April 3, 1969. It defined the Mass as a sacred meeting or assembly of the People of God, met together under the
presidency of the priest, to celebrate the memorial of the Lord." It went on to say that the promise of Christ, 'where two or
three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them' is eminently true of the local community in the
Church." A vigorous protest made by Cardinal Ottaviani resulted in this and other articles of the Instruction being made
more orthodox But the campaign for Congregationalism continues incessantly. An article in "Modern Liturgy" (Nov. '93)
insists that, according to Vatican II, the altar area should be in a central position with the people grouped around and able
to see each other's facial expressions. This "gives emphasis to God's presence as part of the sacred action of gathering as a
faith community" ~. 9.) It is contended that the "House of God" pattern of the past 1500 years must give way to the "House
of the People of God," wherein "the presider and the faith assembly are one." The "House of God" pattern is a two-room
space divided by a communion rail into nave and sanctuary. What is now called for is a one-room space with "the altar
area completely within the gathered assembly. The pattern no longer consists of two distinct and separate spaces but a
place where liturgical celebration and the assembly are integrated. ... Such a pattern completely represents the post-Vatican
II worship space."

Sacred Space (1): The arguments of "Modern Liturgy" in the previous item are well refuted in an article by Mary Podles in
the January 1995 issue of "Laywitness," published by Catholics United for the Faith. Christian architecture, she shows, has
always had and will continue to have a constant predilection for the cruciform church. Its rightness is deeply sensed
because, she says, it "visually articulates the form of The Church itself. The sanctuary, where the priest offers the
sacrifice of the Mass, represents Christ, the head of the Church. The body of the transept (the traverse crossing aisle) and
the nave (the aisle on axis with the altar), where the worshippers congregate represent the body of the Church, the Mystical
Body of which Christ is head. Attempts in the past to replace the cruciform with the central plan church (with the altar
thrust far up front) have always failed. Sense experience repels the central church plan, however ingenious may be the
words with which the theorists justly it. People do not feel right in the novel space which they conjure up.

Remarking that
the most recent attempt to get away from the cruciform church has come in the wake of the liturgical reforms of Vatican II,
Mary Podles continues: lime reforms sought to bring about a return to the Church's patristic roots, to promote greater unity
of heart and mind between priest and congregation, and a fuller mutual participation in the liturgy. To this end the orientation
of the main altar was changed so that we might better see, and seeing, better offer ourselves in union with the great
sacrifice. So the altar was turned so that the priest might face the people. It was done with the best of intentions. In theory it
would have worked well. But theory is a matter of words, and fails to take into account the unconscious response of the
senses. By making the priest the focus of all eyes, the distinction between him and his congregation may have become even
greater. Where once we only saw his back, turned to face in the same direction as we were to offer our common sacrifice,
now we see him face to face, so that his particular personality comes to the forefront. Human nature being what it is, the
temptation to claim center stage for one's own proves too much for many priests. The more they work at bringing
themselves together with the congregation, the more they become a showbiz personality at work. While they may create a
fine feeling of bonhomie and good fellowship, they lose also that effacement of self which acting a role in the sacred drama
demands. The sense of the sacred diminishes.
The priestly role is blurred. ... In an effort to counteract this undesired effect, architects have once again turned their eye
back to the concept of the central plan church in the hopes of reducing the stagelike effect and drawing the People of God
into a unified whole. This I think is one motivation for the wholesale removal of altar rails and the stripping down of the
divisions of space that is taking place in so many churches.... Why is the new liturgy having such a hard time finding a
convincing architectural home? Possibly it contains some deep-seated theological flaw or contradiction which no one has
yet articulated, but which manifests itself in our aesthetic unease. Perhaps we are living in an age that simply lacks creative
vision; these things seem to run in cycles, from flowerings of great genius down long slippery slopes of the second-rate, and
back again.

Or, perhaps, just as art follows cycles, so too does heresy. There is a streak of gnosticism abroad today that
falls in with the untruths of our times, that declares the unimportance to the spirit of the bodily experience and the senses.
But we are embodied creatures. We partake of the material order of creation, and it is important. We do not live by words
alone, but also by the Bread of life. It is only through a sensory and aesthetic vision that the imagination of man can be
grasped and ......... As Christians, we believe that everything has a meaning beyond itself, whether posture, gesture, or
arrangement of architectural spaces: each influences the quality of prayer, and reflects as it shapes our relations to the Lord.
Removing an altar rail is, I realize, a small matter, but it erodes the distinctions of the architect's and the Church's clear
vision. The artist has a finger in the great pie of creation... Art is the imaging of spiritual realities, not abstractions but
realities, in concrete form.... As Christians we see beauty in the world as the stamp of God's hand, his signature on the
canvas of creation, a foretaste of the uncreated light that shone on Mount Tabor. The erosion of religious art and
architecture in the twentieth century is a fading of our view of that light.

The Roman Rite is a supplement to the Precious Blood Banner P.O. Box 8100, Station T, Ottawa, Canada, KiG 3H6

The Klaus Gamber critique (4): Abbot Gerard's preface to The Reform of the Roman Liturgy by the late Mgr. Klaus
Gamber calls attention to three major themes of his critique. First, liturgy is a living organism in that it pertains to custom
springing from the life of the people. Therefore change should be organic, not fabricated. Secondly, religious rites give
stability and security to man in a ceaselessly changing world. Changes introduced by postconciliar reformers have
destabilized people and made them feel insecure. Thirdly, if the priest is turned to the people instead of to the Lord, the
Mass becomes badly disoriented. Having commented the first and third of these reasons in issues 2 and 6 respectively, we
now take up the second. Deeper than the other two, it underlies them. It is intuitive as well as rational and embraces our
profound emotions. Gamber does not discourse at length on this matter, at least in the excerpts translated into English. In
the book mentioned, he approaches the question in pages 105-111 by means of the unique German concept heimat which
means homeland. We become first aware of heimat in our earliest childhood, associating it with the house we grow up in,
the peace and security we experience because of the presence of our mother at home, and familiar scenes and things
around. This concept applies even more deeply in regard to the Church, our religious home.

We will simply quote three
passages at the beginning, in the middle and at the end of his remarks, the first being on page 105: "The religious person
seeks security in the Church as his Mother. He hopes to find shelter and help for his troubled soul, answers to the probing
questions posed by his intellect, but above all, he wants certainty about the Last Things. What he seeks is the Church as an
oasis of tranquillity and peace, peace 'such as the world cannot give' (John 14:26.)u The second on page 109 says that
change must be that of normal growth and not disruptive: "The liturgy continues to be our
home even if it changes and develops over time. During the course of the almost 2000 years of Church history, it has
evolved constantly. But the important point to consider here is that in the past there has never been an actual break with the
Church's tradition, as has happpened now, and in such a frightening way, where almost everything the Church represents is
being questioned The third quotation, on page 110, is conclusive: "Particularly pernicious in this respect is the incessant
nature of the changes to which we are subjected. This is diametrically opposed to the concept of the liturgy as our home."
Cardinal Ratzinger wrote a commemorative piece on the occasion of Gamber's death in which he was able to go deeper
into his concept of heimat, thanks his familiarity with the German's liturgical studies as a whole in the German language. The
home we really long for is heaven, with its peace and security. We came from God Who created us as His children and we
are destined to return home to Him. We will write later an item on Gamber's concept of heimat and liturgy according to
Ratzinger.

Horizontal liturgy (1): The Vineyard movement, a bible and prayer type of meeting, is supposed to be conducted under the
action of the Spirit. We have been asked to say what we think of it but, up to now, not knowing what to say, we have let
ourselves be guided by mother's maxim: "There are things better left unsaid." One way to have new ideas is to have a bath.
As we shower most of the time, we rarely take a bath. But as we were short of ideas to compile this issue of The Roman
Rite, we had a bath instead of showering. Now the difference between showering and having a bath is between the vertical
and horizontal positions. We had not been long in the horizontal position when Eureka! (as the Greek philosopher
Archimedes shouted when he got a brilliant idea while having a bath) an idea came to us. Vineyard
liturgy is the utmost in horizontalism. The climactic moment is when people hit the carpet and lie prostrate and quiet if not
writhing, groaning or shouting. This enthusiastic vogue has reached a couple of Catholic churches in our city in which
Reverend Fathers have literally been floored. And that is what it is. Postconciliar reformers are gungho on horizontal liturgy.
Well now we know where they are leading us. An answer also came to another question which has been puzzling us. Our
spirit-moved reformers have introduced into the Roman Rite the epiclesis (i.e. a prayer asking the Holy Spirit to change the
bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ.) This is an innovation untypical of the Roman Rite. Why? The answer
we thought of is that it pertains to the genius of the Roman Rite to focus on the Mass primarily as an action of Christ, not of
the Holy Spirit whose role rather is to support all that Christ does instead of acting independently.

Inculturation (2): Since the appearance of the
latest instruction of the Congregation for Divine Worship about Inculturation, commentaries of the liturgical literati have
been cropping up in learned journals. As all we have seen so far is gobbledegook, it seems that, for the time being, the
'experts" are out of their depth. At this stage, all we know about inculturation is that it is the second phase of the
postconciliar reform movement. The word for the first phase is litruncation or the lopping of the branches of the splendid
tree which the Roman Rite had become especially during its period of development from the sixth to the sixteenth centuries.
They not only lopped off the branches but cut the trunk down to a stump. This was in order to leave room for the second
phase which is to consist of a new inculturated Mass which they hope will spring from the stump.

The monastic milieu (1): Our Lord says that he
who is learned in things pertaining to the Kingdom of Heaven is like the father of a family who can bring forth treasures both
new and old
(Mt. 13:52.) Our holy father, John Paul II, has wisely willed, in a motu proprio of July 2, 1988, that the Roman Catholic
Church shall provide the treasure of the old Roman rite as well as the new. The most stable and fruitful environment of the
Roman Rite has always been, and will ever continue to be, the monastic milieu. Several Benedictine monasteries and a
Dominican priory in France treasure the ancient Latin rite of our Lord's holy Mass. Heaven rewards them with a goodly
number of vocations to the priesthood. In corresponding with such monasteries to learn more about this consoling
development which augurs well for the future of the Mass of all ages, we have learned from St Joseph's Abbey at Flavigny,
not far from Dijon, that both the old and the new forms of the Roman Rite coexist peacefully under its roof. The daily
conventual Mass is according to the Novus Ordo, but celebrated in Latin (in obedience to art. 36 of the Constitution on the
Liturgy of Vatican II) and also with the celebrant facing the altar. That is, he who officiates at the altar and those present in
the abbey church - monks and visitors - face in the same direction, towards the Lord. And that was undoubtedly intended
by the Fathers of Vatican II because they said nothing to indicate that the practice extending over two millennia of the
history of the Church should come to an end. The innovation of saying Mass towards the people has happened post sed
non propter Concilium (i.e. after but not because of the Council.) Only one priest celebrates. The other monks who are
priests, in addition to assisting at the conventual Mass, celebrate their own Mass privately. And not a few of these private
celebrations are according to the Tridentine Missal of Pius V (revised by John XXIII in 1962.) The peaceful co-existence
of the both forms of the Holy Mass is a lesson to be reflected upon seriously by each and every bishop who is too afraid to
let these two forms coexist in the spaciousness of his diocese. The history of the Roman Church shows clearly that it has
never been the rite which unites the faithful, but the Mass itself irrespective of rite.

The Roman Rite is a supplement to the Precious Blood Banner P.O. Box 8100, Station T, Ottawa, Canada, KiG 3H6

The monastic milieu (2): Where the Mass of all ages has best survived and thrived is no doubt in the haven of that ageless
institution, the monastery. Today, there are religious houses in France for men and women which harbour the ancient
Roman Rite. Given that young men from other countries including Canada and the United States are attracted to such
monasteries, it is only a question of time before they will be able to make foundations outside France. Fontgombault has
already made a foundation in Italy, in addition to two foundations in France, and is most likely to found in the United States.
This could well start a trend in the western Church as a whole. The new rite is also celebrated in monasteries in an edifying
manner which assures its survival, sheltered from the depredations of liturgical reformers over whom the Holy See and the
Bishops generally have lost control, as well as from gnostic revolutionary movements such as that of feminism.

The Klaus Gamber critique (5): In Crossing the Threshold of Hope, John-Paul II says Be not afraid. This advice is needed
by those who strive to bring back the century-old movement of liturgical reform from the deviant course followed since
Vatican II. Klaus Gamber is ostracized for pointing out that what the present reformers are doing is not justified by the
Council's Constitution on the Liturgy. On the occasion of his untimely death in 1989, Cardinal Ratzinger wrote a tribute to
his memory entitled "The fearlessness of a true witness." We will begin in our next issue to set forth its contents.
Maison-Dieu (1): Such is the title of a quarterly review published by the National Pastoral Centre for the Liturgy at Paris.
Its issue No 200 (4th quarter of 1994) commemorates its 50th anniversary. This Centre has played a remarkable role since
it began in the movement of liturgical reform. Prominent associates of this Centre and
contributors to its review were also members of
the Consilium, that is, the committee of forty experts commissioned by Paul VI to implement the Constitution on the Liturgy
of Vatican II. The founder and director of the Centre, Mgr Martimort was the closest collaborator of Bugnini, whom Paul
VI made the chief artisan of his reform. The Maison-Dieu group and similar groups elsewhere in the world through which
the Consilium worked have played a double role, that of research and activism. The review Maison-Dieu is an the organ of
research. The National Pastoral Centre of the Liturgy of which it is the oracle is activist as its name implies. The question
has to be posed: How can pure, or disinterested, research be bound up with activism? Is the activism influenced by the
research or vice versa? This question is pertinent because the whole thrust of the liturgical movement of reform, as
conceived by the Consilium and implemented by the liturgical establishment generally has been experimental, that is, based
on experiments to find out whether this or that liturgical initiative is good and bad. Ironically such research based on
experiments to see if such and such a liturgical practice is good or bad, can render the name Maison-Dieu obsolete.
Researchers of this school now contend that the place of worship should no longer be called "House of God" but "House of
the People."
And how do they arrive at such a conclusion? They do so by experimenting with new spatial arrangements for
prayer. Thus the activism guides the research. This is a radical reversal of the liturgical research conducted up to the time of
the Second Vatican Council and which was based on the principal: agitur sequitur esse, that is, action follows being or we
act according to what we are. We must determine what God has made us to be, and intends us to become, in order to
know how to act. This was the principle that inspired the Gregorian reform which Pope St.
Pius X launched and which was in full swing until the Second Vatican Council. It is in the nature of liturgy to be beautiful.
So the liturgical movement of reform must seek to develop what the liturgy is by nature: beautiful. That is why Pope St. Pius
X said that he wanted the people to be sure of the beauty of their prayer. Why did liturgical theory and practice reverse
itself under the influence of the Consilium and allies such as the National Pastoral Centre at Paris? Because a different kind
of liturgical researcher and a different kind of liturgical practitioner came on the scene and displaced the researchers and
practitioners associated with the Gregorian Reform that had been carried on for sixty years prior to the Second Vatican
Council. The two sides clashed at the International Congress of Liturgy at Assisi in 1956 and remained locked in struggle
until the death of John XXIII.

This pope, because he favoured what can be called the "preconciliar side," put aside Bugnini
who was building up what later became the postconciliar side. This other side was favoured by Paul VI who reinstated
Bugnini and made him the chief artisan of the liturgical reform until 1975. In that year he became disillusioned with Bugnini
and sent him into exile. His school of thought and action had prevailed over the former by engaging in a power struggle to
get control of the liturgical movement. Thus they became a political movement and therefore hardly capable of being able to
appreciate what pure and disinterested research is, let alone promote it. It is interesting in this connection to see how the
Maison-Dieu group reacted when the two works of Mgr Klaus Gamber were published in French in 1992 which called
into question the whole thrust of the liturgical reform as organized by the Consilium and the liturgical establishment.
Gamber was a researcher of the old school, that is, entirely concerned with the nature of the liturgy as that which should
determine what liturgical practice should be. First of all the Maison-Dieu group did not consider these recent books as
worthy to be reviewed. They did not extend the hospitality
of their "House of God" to a fellow scholar. Nevertheless Mgr. Martimort was stung into making a reply but did so in a
Paris newspaper. Also he did not respond to Mgr. Gamber's arguments. Instead he called into question Mgr. Gamber's
reputation as a scholar and even suggested that Cardinals Ratzinger, Oddi and Stickler risked their credibility by
commending Gamber's critique. Another and more recent incident has occurred which calls into question the manner in
which the liturgical reform has been carried out and which has prompted the Maison-Dieu to retort, this time in its own
pages. In our next item, we will take up this matter.

Pope Paul VI (2): This item is a sequel to that under the same heading in our issue No.7 and which had to do with the
biography of Paul VI by Yves Chiron. On December 19, 1993, Chiron was interviewed by a radio station at Paris called
Radio-Courtoisie together with Jean Guitton, intimate friend and confidant of Paul VI and one of Chiron's principal sources.
In the course of a protracted discussion between the interviewer and Jean Guitton, the latter made the startling statement
that Paul VI intended the Mass to be revised in a manner as to make it congenial to Protestants. Guitton even asserted that
Paul VI wanted the Mass to be "Calvinized." While Guitton's statement sounds quite incredible, he has to be taken
seriously. So when Chiron's book was reviewed in Maison-Dieu, (No.199, 3rd quarter of 1994) Pierre Marie Gy, O.P. (a
Consilium member) referred not only to Guitton's devastating remarks but also to his great age (he was born in 1901) thus
suggesting that his memory is failing. Yet Matson-Dieu is certainly in a position to know whether or not Paul VI intended
the liturgical reform movement to be an exercise in ecumenism. Here, as in the case of Gamber, there is no attempt to refute
a damaging case with the aid of the erudite and intimate knowledge they have of the reform. They simply dismiss the person
in question as senile and ignore what he says. This is a political, not a scholarly, reaction.

The Roman Rite is a supplement to the Precious Blood Banner P.O. Box 8100, Station T, Ottawa, Canada, KiG 3H6

Wild masses (4): The annals of the past thirty years are filled with the exploits of the liturgical reformer. Now a new type of
zealot is vying for attention: the liturgical performer. He emulates big entertainers who identified themselves with some
popular song which is played whenever they present themselves on stage. This practice was introduced as a liturgical
gimmick by a Redemptorist preacher who, when on a mission to a parish of Seattle in March, 1994, projected himself to
his audience by singing Hello Dolly from time to time. He proposed, in his homily, that his hearers need not be afraid when
they die. For, on appearing before the throne of judgment, they will find themselves greeted by God with "Hello Dolly!
Well, Hello Dolly! Its nice to have you back, etc." In order that this preacher might occupy centre stage, the table used as
altar was moved to one side of the sanctuary, thus reducing the Mass to a sideshow. The reverend performer ended his
antics by exiting backwards towards the rear of the sanctuary, waving and bowing as he put every-thing into his crowning
rendition of Hello Dolly.

The Klaus Gamber critique (6): Having looked at the main points of the critique which Mgr Klaus Gamber has made of the
current liturgical reform, the next thing to ask is: What is the concept of the liturgy which inspires his critique? An answer to
this question is found in the tribute to the life and work of Gamber made on the occasion of his death in 1989 by Cardinal
Ratzinger. This tribute appears as a preface to the French translation of excerpts of Gamber's writings published under the
title of La Reforme liturgique en question (Editions Sainte Madeleine, France, 1992.) Ratzinger refers to the main criterion
which lies behind Gamber's critique, namely that liturgical reform must always proceed from the inner heart of the liturgy.
Liturgical speech, gestures and move-
movements as well as the space and atmosphere in which they are deployed must always be consonant with what is
innermost in the liturgy. The law that governs liturgy is the same that governs the person who enacts it. His action must
originate in the depths of what he is. That is the meaning of the axiom: agitur sequitur esse -action follows being. Applied to
a living organism like the liturgy, or to a living person, this means: One must act according to what one is. This criterion of
sincerity is the main feature of Gamber's critique of the present movement of liturgical reform. By what is it moved? If it
does not spring from what liturgy is in its inmost being, it will go in the wrong direction. This main criterion must be kept in
mind when we consider what Ratzinger says in his tribute to Klaus Gamber. His tribute is entitled "The fearlessness of a
true witness." Gamber is a true witness to what liturgical reform should be and he showed great courage in giving this
witness. There are three parts of Ratzinger's homage. First, he speaks of the need for a new liturgical movement which will
spring, this time, from the very inmost centre or heart of the liturgy; secondly, Klaus Gamber must be regarded as a
'father" if not the father of this new movement; and thirdly, the Cardinal states that Gamber's position is consonant with that
of the most eminent historian of the liturgy, J. A. Jungmann, SJ. In further items, we will comment on each of the three parts
of Ratzinger's tribute.

Whither the Mass? (2): What has been happening to the Holy Mass since the Second Vatican Council? In 1988, on the
occasion of commemorating the 25th anniversary of the launching of the liturgical reform, John Paul II asked all the bishops
to give their evaluation of the results, negative and positive. We do not know if they have complied or not, but if they have,
we can be sure, from past experience, that they have
sought and supplied the answer from the very people whose "expertise" is responsible for the future of the Mass having
become so uncertain. The "experts" will have as usual replied in euphoric terms. As for the Holy See itself, it has been
giving its own answer in bits and pieces. Sometimes it speaks in a clear and straight-forward manner as in its declaration
that women cannot be priests. Other answers are ambiguous as in the case of altar girls. Currently, Rome is seized with the
matter of "inclusive" language designed to exclude reference to the Fatherhood of God. Act 1: the S.C. of Divine Worship
gives this permission; Act 2: The S.C. of Doctrine of the Faith rescinds it; Act 3: the Canadian and U.S. Episcopal
Conferences demand that the Holy See reconsider. Our next item is about a perplexing letter written by a Roman
secretary.

The Mgr Re letter (1): Mgr Re has the title of Substitute of the Secretariate of His Holiness. His letter, dated Jan.14, 1994,
written in French has appeared in the April 2, 1995, issue of Documentation catholique, p.310. Addressed to Dr. Eric M.
de Saventhem, president of Una Voce International, it states that the law governing the faithful in the matter of worship is
the Roman Rite "reformed by Pope Paul VI in conformity with the Constitution on the Liturgy of the Second Vatican
Council." The use of the ancient Roman Rite is conceded as a privilege on certain conditions to certain members ()f the
faithful. There is no intention to make this privilege permanent. His preamble refers to a memorandum submitted to the Holy
Father by Dr. de Saventhem. The latter is an eminent jurist and no doubt made a good case for the ancient Roman Rite to
be granted a better legal status. Mgr Re's letter is a rebuff. Yet it admits that "regrettable deficiencies" have marred the
reform and that "perhaps some of the faithful have been hurt ...." That is an understatement.

The damage done to the faithful
by the precipitate and inconsiderate actions of reformers has been grave enough to erupt into schism. As John Paul II
considers that the
remedy lies in the continued use of the ancient form of the Roman Rite, he must at least intend that the remedy last as long
as the affliction. As a schism can last for a dreadfully long time, it is hard to see how any good purpose can be served by
insisting on the temporary nature of the concession. It is the reality, not the legality, of the situation that must be kept in
view. John Paul II has expressed his will that the aspirations of those who desire to worship according to the ancient
liturgical rite be respected and that the bishops should align their will with his in this matter (Ecclesia Dei adflicta, July 2,
1988.) Is the respect due to the legitimate aspirations of the Catholics in question to be regarded as temporary? Is it not to
be feared that Mgr Re's letter will intensify the obduracy of bishops bent on frustrating the Pope's express will that
Catholics worshipping in the manner of their forefathers be granted "full ecclesial communion"? Will it not worsen the
problem of the schism in which the St Pius X Society is involved and to which the "regrettable deficiencies" of the reform
have no doubt largely contributed? The remedy to this schism which the Pope has asked to be applied depends on bishops
being generous in letting the ancient Roman rite continue in use. To infer that the Pope does not intend to continue his
generosity in this matter is to slam the door to reconciliation. Why not leave the matter for Divine Providence to decide?
This would seem to be the policy of John Paul II in permitting seminaries to train priests for the traditional rite of the Latin
Mass. Three such seminaries exist (in Germany, Italy and the U.S.A.) Are they to be regarded as ephemeral institutions?
There are several monasteries and priories in France where the old Mass is allowed to flourish for the reason (cited by
John Paul II) that article 37 of the Constitution on the Liturgy says "The Church has no wish to impose a rigid uniformity in
matters which do not involve the faith or the good of the whole community." Are we now to understand that this wish of
Holy Mother the Church is to be regarded as only temporary?

The Roman Rite is a supplement to the Precious Blood Banner P.O. Box 8100, Station T, Ottawa, Canada, KiG 3H6

Eucharistic Faith (1): The principal criterion of whether the Pauline reform (i.e. the impetus given to the liturgical movement
by Pope Paul VI) is succeeding is whether Eucharistic faith is growing or declining amongst the faithful. By "Eucharistic faith
is meant the belief that Jesus Christ becomes really present under the appearances of bread and wine during the Eucharistic
Prayer of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. In his letter commemorating (in 1988) the 25th anniversary of the Constitution on
the Liturgy of Vatican II (on which the Pauline reform is supposed to be based), John Paul II requested his brother bishops
to evaluate the results of the reform, positive or negative. We do not know how, or even if, the bishops have replied.
However, the bishops are not the only source of information on the subject and in any event, we know that they rely on
what the liturgical establishment chooses to report. All that can be expected from that quarter is a euphoric, not an
objective, assessment. The party line is that there are no major problems; all is going well with the Pauline reform. The truth
is that there are ominous indications to the contrary. An article on "the collapse of Eucharistic faith" has appeared in the
February, 1995, issue of Homiletic and Pastoral Review (New York, Kenneth Baker SJ., editor.) The most pertinent
passage in this article reads as follows: "The latest evidence that many Catholics do not believe in the Real Presence was
supplied last spring in a New York Times/CBS poll. Among its findings was that roughly two adult Catholics out of three in
the United States think that at Mass the bread and wine, rather than being changed into Christ's body and blood, serve as
mere symbolic reminders of Him. The figure was 70% for the two youngest age groups surveyed (those aged 18-29 and
3044) and 58% for those in the 45-64 age group. Even amongst Catholics 65 and older, 45% held the 'symbolic reminder'
view of the
Eucharist, while only 51% of those who said they go to Mass weekly or almost weekly think of the Eucharist as a mere
symbol."

Chapter of errors (2): In our issue No.10 of February, 1995, we remarked that all three Cardinal Prefects of the Doctrine
of the Faith, in office during this postconciliar period, have called into question the wisdom of liturgical changes made since
Vatican II. The three are Cardinals Ottaviani, Seper and Ratzinger. The objections of Ottaviani and Ratzinger have been
made public and are well known. That of Seper was made privately to Cardinal Oddi and revealed many years later in an
interview given by the latter to 30 Days (Italian edition, July, 1991, p.17-19.) Oddi recalled Seper saying in regard to the
second canon or Eucharistic Prayer, "Never shall I celebrate this canon." The problem is the imprecise wording pertaining
to the Real Presence of Our Lord in the Eucharist. In the same interview, Cardinal Oddi points out that the Protestant
Community of Taize, which does not share the Catholic doctrine of the Real Presence, announced when the new Roman
Missal appeared that they saw no reason why they could not use its Second Eucharistic Prayer. Oddi concludes: "My
impression is that those chosen to implement the liturgical reform were not particularly preoccupied with purity of doctrine.
They sought to present things in a way pleasing to anyone with a misguided ecumenical approach."

The Mgr Re letter (2): In our first item under this heading (Issue 13), we discussed Mgr Re's dictum that the privilege of
worshipping according to the ancient Roman Rite is not a permanent concession. Well, as the French say, Qui vivra, ve~a -
whoever lives will see. In this item we ask what can we see at present? Mgr Re says that the Roman Rite "reformed by
Paul VI in conformity with the Constitution of the
Liturgy of the Second Vatican Council." But where, oh where, is such a reformed Roman Rite to be seen? The fact of the
matter is that the rite used virtually everywhere in the postconciliar church is one that is not "reformed in conformity with the
Constitution on the Liturgy If it were, Latin would be the language mainly used (art. 36), Gregorian chant would have pride
of place (art. 116), new customs would be developments of former usages (art. 23) and the substantial unity of the Roman
Rite would be preserved (art. 38). etc. Whoever wants to see the new Mass celebrated in conformity with what the
Second Vatican Council decreed, cannot expect to find it in his parish or diocese. He will have to travel to places like the
Abbey of St. Joseph at Flavigny, France, Westminster Cathedral in London (10.30 Sunday Mass) or St. Agnes Church in
St. Paul, Minnesota. Perhaps there are other places where the Roman Rite is to be found reformed according to the
Constitution on the Liturgy. We are not aware of them.
In any event, such instances are too rare to be considered the rule.

If the rite seen everywhere by the faithful is not in conformity with Vatican II, how can it be the law of worship (l& orandi)?
What then is the legal situation of the new Mass? Is it a situation of law in suspense? - vacatio legis? - the law is not yet in
force? If so, the former lex orandi (i.e. the Roman Rite before Vatican II) is still the rule and the new rite is an exception to
it. That is precisely the reverse of what Mgr Re tells us.

The Klaus Gamber critique (7): Cardinal Ratzinger makes three points in his preface to the French edition of Klaus Gamber's writings published under the title of La Reforme liturgique en question, Editions Sainte Madeleine, 1992. The Cardinal's piece originated as his eulogy on the
occasion of the death of Klaus Gamber in 1989. Giving Gamber the credit that is his due inevitably involves a
condemnation of the direction which the liturgical movement has taken since Vatican II. It is astonishing that Ratzinger did
not let his high office deter him from
pronouncing this condemnation. Why did he take this occasion to speak out? Death is a moment of truth and this Cardinal
Prefect of the Doctrine of the Faith, this No. 2 prelate of the Holy See, evidently considered it a moment of truth not only
for this liturgical scholar who was his friend but also for the present state of the liturgy of the Church. Indeed Mgr Wilhem
Nyssen of Cologne, whose testimonial to Gamber is also included in the same volume, cites Cardinal Ratzinger as
describing Gamber as "the only scholar, facing an army of pseudoliturgists, whose thought truly springs from the heart of the
liturgy of the Church" (p.3.) The main criterion which inspired Gamber, says Rat-zinger, is that liturgical reform should
come from what is inmost in the liturgy. Unfortunately postconciliar reform has been directed into the winning of new and
daring liberties, especially the license to fabricate a new liturgy. Real reform must be effected by penetrating below the
surface of what Catholic worship has always been and rediscovering its living centre. The current reform has moved so far
from this centre that it has degenerated into a kind of show business which seeks to make religion interesting by dint of
novelty and maudlin moralizing. The result has not been renewal but devastation. This repels those who seek not
entertainment but a meeting with the living God. Klaus Gamber sought to give back to the reform movement the inward
spiritual insight and impulsion which it has lost. It is a living organism that must grow and develop from its spiritual roots in
the past. Cardinal Ratzinger notes that Gamber does not support those who insist that the liturgy should remain static. Their
idea is also a deviation. They forget Cardinal Newman's maxim, very pertinent to the ideas of both Ratzinger and Gamber
in the matter of liturgy, that "Growth is the only sign of life." Rigidity is a characteristic of death. To move away from the
impasse of two extremes, superficial innovation on the one hand, and inordinate attachment to the past on the other, a new
spiritual impulsion must be given to the liturgy.

The Roman Rite is a supplement to the Precious Blood Banner P.O. Box 8100, Station T, Ottawa, Canada, KiG 3H6

Observations by Lionel de Thorey (1): The actual state of the Mass in France is the subject of a book: Histoire de la messe
de Gregoire le Grand a nos jours (Perrin, Paris, 1994, 407 p.) The author, Lionel de Thorey, provides an historical
perspective back to Pope SL Gregory the Great (594-604). Impartial and objective, he does not discuss the views of what
he calls "the traditionalist clan" on the one hand and "the progressist movement" on the other. While the abandonment of
Latin as the language of the Mass seems to him to be inevitable, he shows that the fears of those who objected to its
deliberate abolition have been amply justified. Indeed, as far as English is concerned, there has been no attempt or even an
intention to translate the Latin text accurately. The vernacularists have done their thing at the expense of sound doctrine.
Throwing out Gregorian chant, an integral component as well as crowning glory of the Latin Mass, has been much to its
detriment. What Mass is commonly used in the postconciliar church? The Roman Rite revised according according to the
Constitution on the Liturgy of the Council? Such a claim is patently absurd. Reformers have taken it upon themselves to get
rid of, not revise, the old rite. On page 11, Thorey says that the old rite was "put aside" and on page 314 that it was
"rejected." Nonetheless, it still exists legitimately and vigorously in France thanks to some bishops having had recourse to
the 1984 indult granted by Rome in favor of those who remain attached to the Latin Mass. It flourishes even more strongly
in several Benedictine monasteries to which it has been conceded directly by Rome. But in general, it has been replaced
with a new rite which differs from it "in form and in substance" . 308.) Thorey's final conclusion of a factual nature is that
the Western Church now has two 'Roman' rites, old and new. The former is destabilized insofar as its existence depends on
the goodwill of indi
vidual bishops and the latter has not yet been stabilized (1,326.) Catastrophic as the statistics are, Thorey feels he mustleave open the possibility that the situation might have been worse had no changes been made. But for what it is worth, in a
paragraph headed "Effects of the reform of the Mass on the faithful" (p.322) he notes that in France the figure of 40% of
Catholics who went to Mass before the Council had dropped to 13% by 1981. At the same time it was ascertained that
60% of the 13% of Mass goers no longer believed in the Real Presence.

The Mass disappears -what Is to be done? (1):
The Traditional Mass movement should not regard the ancient Roman Rite as an end but as a means. Its end must be to
have an agenda to prevent the Mass itself (irrespective of rite) from disappearing. While the situation in Africa and Asia is
more promising, the Mass is disappearing on a vast scale in Europe, the two Americas, and the English-speaking world. It
is served in these regions by a senescent corps of priests too impotent to renew its ranks. Moreover, too often and in too
many places, Mass is celebrated in a degenerate manner which is accelerating its disappearance. A vast proportion of
Catholics who still go to Mass do not believe in the Real Presence of our Lord on the altar. Keeping the ancient Latin rite
alive and visible, as the Holy See permits the Traditional Mass movement to do, should therefore be regarded as a means
to save the Mass itself from disappearing. Traditional Catholic families attached to the old rite are supplying an important
number of vocations to the priesthood. Also, the ancient Latin Mass serves as the Norm of Tradition which, as long as it is
alive and visible, can impede the reform movement from pushing in the direction of complete discontinuity with what the
Mass has always been and must substantially remain. The Mass itself is our Lord Jesus Christ continuing, through His
priesthood, to change bread and
wine daily into His body and blood as a sacrificial offering and nourishment for His faithful followers. In so doing, day after
day, and everywhere in the world, He is constantly uniting all members of His Mystical Body to Himself. The Mass itself -
that is, Jesus Christ Himself perpetuating His sacrifice on the altar
- has, in the course of time, become differentiated into various rites reflecting different cultures. These rites provide the
diversity characteristic of Catholic unity. The great question for the Traditional Mass movement now is: What should be its
agenda in the light of the need to prevent the Mass itself from disappearing?

To this end, it must seek to preserve the
ancient Latin rite as a means to save the Mass itself, irrespective of rite. Hitherto, its purpose has been to try to persuade
the Holy See to pursue an agenda in favor of the ancient Latin rite. In issuing the document Ecclesia Dei adflicta of July
2,1988, the Holy See seems to have reached the peak of its possibilities in declaring that the aspirations of those who
remain attached to the ancient Latin rite should be respected. But it merely asks the bishops to respect the Traditional Mass
movement. It does not oblige them to do so. Too many have turned a deaf ear up to now. The Traditional Mass movement
has been aided since the late 1960's by the lay organization Una Voce International and more recently by priestly
fraternities which the Holy See allows to train priests to celebrate the ancient Latin Mass. And there are now monasteries,
particularly that of Le Barroux in France, which are aiding the lay people in the Traditional Mass movement. The main
policy of the Traditional Mass movement as a whole so far has been to try to persuade the Holy See to have an effective
agenda to preserve the ancient Latin rite. But it is obvious that the Holy See is now completely blocked. In pursuance of its
policy to persuade the Holy See to have an effective agenda, Una Voce of the U.S.A. presented a petition to the Holy
Father of 40,000 names on January 31, 1994, asking him to take specific measures in
favor of the Traditional Mass movement in North America. This was two weeks after a letter dated January 14, 1994,
written by Mgr Re of the Secretariate of His Holiness, curtly rebuffed a memorandum presented earlier by Dr. Eric de
Saventhem, then President of Una Voce International. (Our paper deals with this rebuff elsewhere.) Presumably the petition
of a branch of Una Voce International, namely that of the U.S.A., cannot expect a better fate.

We learn from Issue 74 of
the newsletter of the Monastery of Le Barroux, just received, that another petition was presented to the Holy Father by the
Abbot of Le Barroux on April 27, 1995. Signed by 75,000 persons, it pleaded for freedom in the use of the Roman Missal
of 1962, that is, freedom from bishops who prohibit rather than permit the ancient Latin rite despite the earnest request of
John Paul II that they be generous. Dom Gerard, Abbot of Le Barroux, was received in private audience and was thus able
to obtain an immediate reply from the Holy Father. The Holy Father, he says, "encouraged us to continue to address our
petitions to the bishops.5 So that's that. It is evident that the Holy See is more in need of help than able to give it at this
particular moment of history. All must play an active role in the task of preventing the disappearance of the Roman Rite.
The Traditional Mass movement must be an active instead of a passive or petitioning body. It must have its own agenda
and not wait until Rome is able to have an effective agenda.

International Centre for Liturgical Studies (1):
An item of good news. scholars have set up a documentation centre in Paris relative to how the Traditional Mass can best
be defended. The Traditional Mass movement needs a case that is well prepared and cogent enough, doctrinally and
spiritually, to persuade bishops individually to accede to the request of the Holy See that they permit the ancient Mass to
survive. The said scholars will meet at the shrine of Notre Dame du Laus, France, from Oct. 4 - 6, 1995. Your editor has
been invited and plans to go.

The Roman Rite is a supplement to the Precious Blood Banner P.O. Box 8100, Station T, Ottawa, Canada, KiG 3H6

The Mgr Re letter (3): This letter of Jan. 17, 1944, addressed to Dr. Eric de Saventhem, president of the International
Federation of Una Voce, gets down to business thus: First let it be noted that the Roman Rite, reformed by Paul VI in
conformity with the Constitution on the Liturgy of the Second Vatican Council as of now is accepted and fruitfully applied
by the very great majority of the faithful. Really? What has been generally accepted in the postconciliar church is not in
conformity with the Constitution on the Liturgy (cf. our issue 14.) And can it be said to be "fruitfully applied by the great
majority of the faithful"? The general abandonment of the sacrament of penance is hardly conducive to fruitful participation
in the Liturgy. In fact, the decline in belief in the Real Presence of our Lord in the Eucharist (70% of those who still go to
Mass according to scientific surveys) makes it starkly clear that the postconciliar liturgy is far from fruitful to the majority of
the faithful. Mgr Re begins by stating what he perceives as the reality of the situation before he enunciates its legality: The
general law remains the use of the rite renovated since the Council while the use of the former rite occurs by way of
privileges which must be regarded as exceptions. Let us note the vague phrase '"the rite renovated since the Council" in
what presumably is intended to be a precise statement of law. In any event, while his position is that of the third most
important secretary of His Holiness, other voices in the Holy See giving forth about what is supposed to be the lex orandi
(the law of worship) are not in agreement with his. Our next item is about a ruling of the papal master of ceremonies
apparently based on his own liturgical expertise rather than on conformity with the Constitution on the Liturgy of the
Second Vatican Council.

The phenomenon of the mega-mass (1): The question must be raised as to whether the megamass, that is, the celebration of
Mass in out-
door stadia before enormous crowds is a desirable development of the Catholic liturgy. Is it logistically possible to ensure
respect for the Holy Eucharist and the sacredness of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in an enormous crowd? The Mass and
the Sacraments bring each member of the faithful into interpersonal communication with our Lord and therefore must be
celebrated in circumstances where immediate communication is possible, that is, not mediated by the apparatus of
electronic technology. The problems of distributing Holy Communion in a manner as to avoid sacrilege become
insuperable. Surely some form of paraliturgy that is not sacramental would be wiser. When hundreds of distributors push
through crowds like food and drink vendors trying to empty their trays, hosts get thrust into the hands of people who throw
them away. One hears of maintenance workers finding hundreds of hosts in the litter left by the crowd. If the Holy Mass is
made a mega-event on behalf of half a million or more people at a time questions inevitably arise which demand answers
that must not be given lightly. The distribution of Holy Communion to huge crowds can easily become a shambles. A priest
we know was eyewitness to a mega-mass in England where nuns left with baskets of undistributed sacred hosts went into
the streets and handed them out to people passing by. A new problem arose in a papal mega-mass celebrated in February
of this year in Australia. It was designed to be the most innovative mass liturgical event hitherto celebrated. The March 5,
1995, issue of The Catholic Weekly, diocesan paper of the Archdiocese of Sydney, described it as "a liturgical
breakthrough" and "an important milestone in appropriate liturgical development." A huge crowd is usually a superficial
agglomeration held loosely held together with electronic audio-visual means -vast flickering screens and a public address
system over which entertaining blather is blared out to keep everybody focussed on what is going on in the far distance.
Innovations have to be ingeniously planned as matter for the patter. The needs of megalomania are quite extraneous to what
liturgy really is. In this case, a foundress of a community of nuns was being beatified. Her nuns turned up in business suits.

Any liturgical meaning in this? Of course not. They literally meant business as they proceeded to the altar with the Pope, the
whole episcopate and all the clergy of Australia. They officiated as acolytes and ministers and saw to the ablution of the
fingers of His Holiness. Blather, blather, blather. There was also aboriginal smoke rising from a drum of hot coals carried
around the altar and the Pope by a native, accompanied by a woman throwing in eucalypse leaves, plus dancing girls, and a
soil mingling act (from different countries where the sisters work.) Blather, blather, blather.

The most innovative feature of
all was 300 ciboria consecrated, not on the altar, but in the hands of 300 men and women at a distance from the altar. That
really was something to blather about. The function of the altar to impart to the elements to be consecrated their sacred and
sacrificial character was eliminated. Never in two thousand years has that ever happened before. Blather, blather, blather.
The Holy Father could not even see the ciboria, let alone pronounce the words of consecration over them. When the
question was raised as to the propriety (and even the validity) of this utterly unprecedented procedure, the answer given
was that the Holy Father's Master of Ceremonies had approved it, months beforehand. He is Mgr Piero Marini who,
immediately he was ordained in 1965, was engaged by the Congregation for Divine Worship where he spent ten years
before becoming the papal master of ceremonies. To put the matter in a nutshell, he is a liturgical expert par excellence. He
is quoted in an article in Knights of Columbus magazine Columbia of September, 1995, as deploring that "in many cases,
we have lost a sense of the sacred." In regard to the Australian mega-mass the plans of
which he approved himself, he certainly has a point. The objective sacredness emanating from the altar imbues those who
offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass thereon with the subjective holiness proper to their vocation. Even altar boys
experience this. Their physical proximity to the holy altar while serving at Mass becomes a spiritual proximity to the
vocation to the priesthood. Not a few of them do in fact become priests. The altar never ceases to sanctify their vocation as
well as give the bread and wine they put on it a sacred and sacrificial character prior to being consecrated. This sacred
function of the altar cannot be ignored or repudiated. The altar is not a casual piece of furniture to be discarded at the whim
of innovators. The question raised by this utterly strange departure from the Roman Rite cannot be brushed off by saying "It
is approved by the personal liturgical expert of His Holiness."

Postmortem of postconciliar church (1): The postconciliar church of the past thirty years, with its new eccelesiology and
hugely inflated notion of the excellence of the direction which it has given to liturgical reform is not the real Church of
"yesterday, today and the same for ever." The euphoric tone of the postconciliar progressive press was first set by the chief
artisan of the Pauline reform, Annibale Bugnini. As the all powerful secretary of the Consilium empowered by Paul VI to
implement the Constitution on the Liturgy of Vatican II, he declared the new Roman Missal, largely confected by himself,
"has a greater richness than all that has been seen in twenty centuries" (Carrefours, Oct.22, 1969.) But the missal of which
he spoke, issued in 1969, was a miscarriage. He had to withdraw, re-edit and reprint it a year later. There are now signs
that reality is beginning to re-assert itself. Hence the postmortem of the postconciliar church cannot be put off much longer.
Even the progressive press is becoming inclined to let writers express deep misgivings. We will note what they say in future
items under this heading.

The Roman Rite is a supplement to the Precious Blood Banner P.O. Box 8100, Station T, Ottawa, Canada, KiG 3H6

Altar girls (8): To 15000 mass servers assembled at Rome on August 29th, Pope John Paul II said: "When the priest poses
the acts of Christ and utters His words This is my body; this is blood, He (Christ) Himself is present in your midst. The
altar, centred in the sanctuary, is then the place of grace, of Christ really present and giving Himself to the members of His
Body. Servants of this mystery, you are its firsthand witnesses and one day perhaps you may be its privileged actors. If
Jesus calls upon you to follow and surrender to Him your lives by becoming His priests, respond accordingly.5 Was the
Holy Father speaking only to altar boys? No, there were three or four thousand altar girls before him as well. A few days
later, on Sept. 3rd, in his Angelus remarks he spoke effusively in reference to the United Nations Beijing Conference on
Women: "Today I appeal to the whole Church to be willing to foster feminine participation in every way in its internal life.
Within the great variety of different and complementary gifts that enrich ecclesial life, many important possibilities are open
to them. The 1987 Synod on the laity expressed precisely this need and asked that without discrimination women should be
participants in the life of the Church .... I am thinking, for example, of theological teaching, the forms of liturgical ministry
permitted, including service at the altar ...."

No doubt in the limited timeframe of an Angelus talk, the Holy Father could not
make it explicitly clear, as he has on other occasions, that like our Lord, he has to discriminate between men and women in
that only males can be ordained to the priesthood. Moreover, it is monstrous to claim that this will of Christ is derogatory to
the dignity of women. The Church throughout history has likewise discriminated between men and women by stipulating
that only males must enter the sanctuary during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in order to serve and
assist the priest. That firm tradition, unbroken for two millennia, was firmly upheld at the 1987 Synod of Bishops. After an
exhaustive debate, it overwhelmingly decided not to propose to the Pope that girls be altar servers. Some bishops from
Canada, the United States and Australia had tried hard to bend the Synod in their direction and failed. For some
unexplained reason, they succeeded later in bending the Congregation of Divine Worship to their will. Ever since, the
question has been shrouded with ambiguity and confusion. Rome has not approved altar girls. All it has said is that
individual bishops may permit or prohibit the practice as they see fit. In this context, the words of John Paul II to altar
servers on August 29th and his Beijing appeal on Sept. 3rd have added to the confusion. A concrete example of such
confusion is evident in an item in the German review Theologisches (February, 1995) relating to an incident about some
new altar servers (girls) being presented at a Sunday Mass. To each of them, the parish priest gave a handshake and a
diploma. One of them, he informed the congregation, was a Protestant. During the Mass he gave her Holy Communion. To
anyone objecting, his confused state of mind would prompt him to reply, "In a case of this nature, I must act without
discrimination

Errors of the innovators (1): This phrase occurs in the encyclical Apostolicae curae (Sept. 13, 1896) of Leo XIII. The
complete sentence is:
"They knew only too well the intimate bond which unites faith with worship, 'the law of belief with the law of prayer,' and
so, under the pretext of restoring it to its primitive form, they corrupted the order of the liturgy in many respects to adapt it
to the errors of the innovators." This sentence appears as the foreword of a 50-page study by Rev. Anthony Cekada, more
details of which are given in our
next item. Leo XIII referred to what the Protestant reformers of the 16th century did to the Mass. Fr. Cekada speaks of
innovators within the Catholic Church and moreover within the Consilium which Paul VI appointed to revise the Roman
Rite. This was a body of 60 members (including 50 prelates around the world) plus more than 200 consultors and
counsellors. It comprised thirteen subcommittees and various working groups. Fr. Cekada's study deals with group 18B
which changed the prayers proper to the Temporal Cycle (Advent, Christmas, Lent, Easter, etc.) and to the Masses for the
Saints.

Postmortem of postconciliar church (2): The Tablet of July 8, 1995, tells about a gathering in England of priests and
bishops at which was discussed the future of the priesthood. The most remarkable speaker, it thought, was Fr. Michael
Hollings who advocated that there be married priests and priestesses. But admits the Tablet, the most controversial
speaker was Fr. Adrian Nichols, O.P. of Cambridge ... who pleaded for a revival of the idea of the "sacrificing priest." He
said that modern liturgical practice gave the wrong impression and made priests look like "hosts of TV chat shows." He
boldly suggested that in celebrating Holy Mass, the priest should face eastward and keep his back to the people.

The Roman Rite is a supplement to the Precious Blood Banner P.O. Box 8100, Station T, Ottawa, Canada, KiG 3H6

Feminism in the Catholic Church (1): Within the Catholic Church, the Feminist movement is the source of campaigns for
altar girls, inclusive language and the ordination of women to the priesthood. The anthology of feminist writings published
under the tide of Womanspirit rising gives an idea of what feminism is about. One contributor, Edith Pagel, admits its
connection with the second-century gnostic movement m Phrrygia known as Montanism. The Montanists ordained women
as priests and bishops. Catholic writers of the time such as St. Iraeneus treat gnosticism as a heresy. But modern gnosticism
in the Church reveals itself more as a form of apostasy. A given heresy can negate a single doctrine while leaving all other
doctrines of the Faith intact. But apostasy repudiates the whole of the Catholic Faith. A Catholic who knowingly professes
feminism repudiates the very virtue of Faith since he or she maintains that one is saved by knowledge (gnosis), not by Faith.
No doubt there are people who embrace feminism without realizing clearly enough what it is. They do not therefore
knowingly profess it. So there is a possibility of dialogue in their regard.

Is there a future for Latin in our Church? (1):
Insofar as we speak of the Roman Catholic Church, known as the western as distinct from eastern churches, she is the
Church of the Latin or Roman Rite. The Fathers of the Second Vatican Council decreed in article 23 of the Constitution on
the Liturgy that its language must continue to be Latin. The fact that the thing which calls itself the postconciliar church has
chosen to ignore the Council on this point does not mean that Latin is dead. It simply means that Latin is going through a
period of eclipse until wisdom returns. The idiot who first said Latin is a dead language, and those who continue to repeat
this absurdity, should be ignored. Latin is a master language compared to the vernacular, which is of an inferior kind.
Vernacular in Latin means "born to slavery." In the Latin Vulgate edition of the Bible, Jeremiah 2, verse 14: we read
numquam servus est Israel aut vemaculus? Jeremiah is lamenting that Israel has relapsed into slavery again, meaning
idolatry. Latin is the matrix of the modern European languages, that which gives them their vitality. They are only masterful
tongues insofar as they derive their vitality from Latin. When they deteriorate, that is, when they lose their Latin
masterfulness, they become prey to fashions, ideologies and the like. Insofar as American and Canadian bishops are
currently insisting that "inclusive" language be used in the liturgy (there is a dramatic struggle going on between them and the
Holy See in this matter), they are seeking to enslave the English liturgy to the feminist ideology. Incidentally, it is ridiculous
to call it 'Inclusive" for its ultimate purpose is to exclude mention of the Fatherhood of God. They are degrading English to
the level of a vernacular language by imposing on it the servitude of a gnostic ideology. In any event, Latin is neither dying
nor likely to die as long as society remains civilized to some extent. There is no reason for discarding it as the language of
the Catholic liturgy. Paul Likoudis writes in Challenge magazine (Nov., 1995, p.8): "Across North America, enrollment in
high school and college Latin programs is expanding dramatically. Not only because parents realize there is a definite
correlation between learning Latin and doing well on standard tests, but because students themselves appreciate how Latin
enhances their spelling ability and increases their mental discipline." Paul Likoudis also speaks of the resurgence of Latin in
the liturgy and gives as an example the parish of St. Agnes in Baton Rouge, Louisiana: "Before St. Agnes was designated
the site for the weekly Latin mass, its future was in doubt because of aging membership and a deteriorating neighborhood.
Since the Latin liturgy returned, young people
are starting to flock to the church, young couples with large families are seen again, and many who stopped practicing their
faith have returned to the sacraments." His conclusion is:
"When you bring back Latin, you bring back life." He quotes Dr. Robert Edgewood, president of the Latin Liturgy
Association of North America, as saying that he is encouraged to see "the growing number of young priests and
seminarians who say they want to celebrate the Mass in Latin and as groups such as the Priestly Fraternity increase, the
number of Latin Masses will increase, and Latin will become even more popular." The Priestly Fraternity to which he refers
is authorized by the Holy See to train priests to celebrate the ancient Latin Mass. They have two seminaries, one in
Germany and another in Scranton, Pennsylvania. They are currently seeking to organize one in France also.

Altar girls (9): The postconciliar church never
ceases to be innovative. Having girls and women assist at the altar is, in the context of the history of the Holy Sacrifice of
the Mass, an astonishing innovation. Not only that, it gives rise to an in-satiable desire for still more audacious innovation.
The latest issue of the French review Una Voce (Oct-Nov '95) published at Paris, gives an idea of how voracious the
appetite for innovation can become. A reader writes about an innovative parish church of a tourist resort in France where
he went for his vacation in 1994 and 1995. Last year, arriving before the Mass, he 'witnessed the parish priest, not yet
vested and in shirt sleeves, in the course of going to and fro in the church, carrying a ciborium up to the choir loft at the
back. This was for the convenience of the choir members. They could communicate where they were instead of having to
descend and make their way to the sanctuary. Was this ciborium consecrated at a distance and out of sight instead of being
consecrated on the altar? In that case it happened in France before it happened in Australia during a papal mega-mass (cf.
our issue No.16.) This sort of thing reveals a nonchalant or anything-can-happen attitude.
This year, when the writer of the letter went to Mass in the same vacation resort, he was confronted by the spectacle of
two teenage girls robed in albs standing beside the celebrant at the altar. When he came to the offertory and held up the
paten with host to be consecrated, each of the two girls likewise held up hosts to be consecrated. After the priest had
pronounced the words of consecration, they again held up their sacred hosts as he elevated his. In other words, what this
astonished reader witnessed was active participation on the part of the girls to the extent that they mimed his gestures,
standing side by side with him. Their posture was that of being, or on the verge of becoming, concelebrants. But the fact of
facing the people in doing so poses an acute choreographical problem: how can the dimension of mystery be emphasized?
There is no mystery in their faces or in that of the priest. They can only be empty of expression since they know not what
they are doing. This innovation therefore urgently calls for another still more startling. As miming is done most expressively
with artificial faces, such female altar servers must paint themselves like geisha girls and the presider remedy his own facial
vacuity with the enigmatic mask of an idol.

Postmortem of postconciliar church (3): The progressive press, no longer euphoric about the success of the liturgical reform, has begun the postmortem of the postconciliar church. We have given an example from the Tablet in the United Kingdom (cf. our issue 17.) America, a U.SA. publication, has in its issue of April 15, 1995, an article entitled "One Hundred Journeys" by Fr. James N. Gelson.
He begins: "In a little more than two years I have been the homilist at every Mass on 100 weekends in 100 parishes
scattered through 24 states" He found the morale of priests very low, although their perseverance is admirable. One pastor
said to him, We are running clubhouses now, not temples." Fr. Gelson's own conclusion is: "We have robbed one another
of the sacred in our lives, and we have allowed others to rob us."

The Roman Rite is a supplement to the Precious Blood Banner P.O. Box 8100, Station T, Ottawa, Canada, KiG 3H6